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...
Key issues of levy of GST on export of goods to the petitioner's Maldives office, zero-rate supplies, fixed establishment, location of recipient and supplier of services. The court held that the petitioner and respondent had fixed establishments in Addu City, Maldives, and the petitioner was re-registered there, not constituting a separate legal entity. The scope of judicial review was discussed, and the court found that the immovable property and place of supply were in Maldives, outside India. Section 13(4) of the IGST Act governs such cases where the supply, location of recipient and supplier are outside India, precluding GST levy u/ss 9 of CGST Act or 5 of IGST Act. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the respondents were directed to reimburse the GST, interest and penalty paid by the petitioner within 90 days.
Key issues of levy of GST on export of goods to the petitioner's Maldives office, zero-rate supplies, fixed establishment, location of recipient and supplier of services. The court held that the petitioner and respondent had fixed establishments in Addu City, Maldives, and the petitioner was re-registered there, not constituting a separate legal entity. The scope of judicial review was discussed, and the court found that the immovable property and place of supply were in Maldives, outside India. Section 13(4) of the IGST Act governs such cases where the supply, location of recipient and supplier are outside India, precluding GST levy u/ss 9 of CGST Act or 5 of IGST Act. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the respondents were directed to reimburse the GST, interest and penalty paid by the petitioner within 90 days.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
