Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
The respondent authority failed to provide reasons for levying...
Transfer of goods between own units without sale shouldn't attract interest/penalty. Authorities must give reasons as per CBIC circular & court precedents.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
The respondent authority failed to provide reasons for levying interest and penalty, despite the goods being transferred between the petitioner's establishments, not sold. The court relied on CBIC's circular and previous judgments in Dhabriya Polywood Ltd. and Orson Holdings Company Ltd., which granted benefit of doubt and considered lack of ill-intent, respectively. The impugned orders were quashed and set aside, and the matter was remanded for a fresh de novo order, assigning detailed reasons after hearing the petitioner, considering the cited decisions.
The respondent authority failed to provide reasons for levying interest and penalty, despite the goods being transferred between the petitioner's establishments, not sold. The court relied on CBIC's circular and previous judgments in Dhabriya Polywood Ltd. and Orson Holdings Company Ltd., which granted benefit of doubt and considered lack of ill-intent, respectively. The impugned orders were quashed and set aside, and the matter was remanded for a fresh de novo order, assigning detailed reasons after hearing the petitioner, considering the cited decisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
