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 quashed a letter dated March 13, 2024, issued by the Superintendent (A.E.) Central Goods and Service Tax, Gautam Budh Nagar, advising voluntary tax payments without proper legal basis. The Court observed that the Department was advising the petitioner to make voluntary payments without issuing any show cause notice/demand notice/recovery notice, which is unknown in law. The respondents failed to indicate any provision under which such a letter could be issued. The Court directed the authorities to be cautious and refrain from issuing such letters tantamounting to pressure tactics, allowing the petition.
The High Court quashed a letter dated March 13, 2024, issued by the Superintendent (A.E.) Central Goods and Service Tax, Gautam Budh Nagar, advising voluntary tax payments without proper legal basis. The Court observed that the Department was advising the petitioner to make voluntary payments without issuing any show cause notice/demand notice/recovery notice, which is unknown in law. The respondents failed to indicate any provision under which such a letter could be issued. The Court directed the authorities to be cautious and refrain from issuing such letters tantamounting to pressure tactics, allowing the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
