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 directed the respondents to process the petitioner's refund applications filed u/s 54 of the Central/Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act within one month. If the respondents intend to reject the applications, they must provide reasons and afford the petitioner an opportunity to be heard before passing an order. The petition was disposed of based on the respondents' statement to comply with the court's directions.
The High Court directed the respondents to process the petitioner's refund applications filed u/s 54 of the Central/Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act within one month. If the respondents intend to reject the applications, they must provide reasons and afford the petitioner an opportunity to be heard before passing an order. The petition was disposed of based on the respondents' statement to comply with the court's directions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.