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 High Court examined a challenge against a notification issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, questioning its validity u/s 168(A) of the CGST Act, 2017 due to lack of GST Council recommendation. The court found the notification prima facie inconsistent with the law, indicating potential failure of actions based on it. An assessment of force majeure applicability in light of GST Council meeting minutes was deemed necessary, with authorities given a chance to present their stance and evidence. Pending further notice, petitioners were granted interim protection against coercive measures based on the contested assessment order. Respondents were instructed to submit affidavits by a specified date for further proceedings.
The High Court examined a challenge against a notification issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, questioning its validity u/s 168(A) of the CGST Act, 2017 due to lack of GST Council recommendation. The court found the notification prima facie inconsistent with the law, indicating potential failure of actions based on it. An assessment of force majeure applicability in light of GST Council meeting minutes was deemed necessary, with authorities given a chance to present their stance and evidence. Pending further notice, petitioners were granted interim protection against coercive measures based on the contested assessment order. Respondents were instructed to submit affidavits by a specified date for further proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
