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...
Principles of natural justice violated due to errors apparent on record. Petitioner claimed inability to respond or participate due to unawareness of proceedings. Court held that tax computation erred by considering total turnover instead of turnover difference between profit and loss account and GSTR 9. Petitioner's explanation of unawareness unacceptable for a large corporate entity. However, substantial liability imposed without considering GSTR 9C reconciliation statement. Cumulatively, opportunity granted to petitioner to contest tax demand by remitting Rs.2.50 crore within four weeks and submitting reply with relevant documents. Impugned order set aside subject to compliance. Petition disposed of.
Principles of natural justice violated due to errors apparent on record. Petitioner claimed inability to respond or participate due to unawareness of proceedings. Court held that tax computation erred by considering total turnover instead of turnover difference between profit and loss account and GSTR 9. Petitioner's explanation of unawareness unacceptable for a large corporate entity. However, substantial liability imposed without considering GSTR 9C reconciliation statement. Cumulatively, opportunity granted to petitioner to contest tax demand by remitting Rs.2.50 crore within four weeks and submitting reply with relevant documents. Impugned order set aside subject to compliance. Petition disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
