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 petitioner challenged the assessment order solely on the ground of not availing the statutory remedy of appeal. The court held that the petitioner did not file an appeal and allowed the assessment order to become final, subsequently approaching the court through a writ petition to challenge the tax, interest, and penalty determination. The petitioner was given an opportunity for a hearing, and the impugned order was passed thereafter. No plausible explanation was provided for not resorting to the statutory appeal remedy. The petitioner consciously chose not to file an appeal u/s 107 of the RGST/CGST Act, 2017, allowing the limitation period and the maximum condonable delay period to expire. Having not preferred an appeal, the writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable.
The petitioner challenged the assessment order solely on the ground of not availing the statutory remedy of appeal. The court held that the petitioner did not file an appeal and allowed the assessment order to become final, subsequently approaching the court through a writ petition to challenge the tax, interest, and penalty determination. The petitioner was given an opportunity for a hearing, and the impugned order was passed thereafter. No plausible explanation was provided for not resorting to the statutory appeal remedy. The petitioner consciously chose not to file an appeal u/s 107 of the RGST/CGST Act, 2017, allowing the limitation period and the maximum condonable delay period to expire. Having not preferred an appeal, the writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
