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 held that Section 129(5) of the State Act, which stipulates that upon payment of the entire amount pursuant to a notice u/s 129(3), all proceedings related to that notice shall be deemed concluded, applies only when the entire amount stated in the show cause notice is paid. However, it does not preclude the right to file an appeal against the order passed u/s 129(3) within the stipulated time. The Court opined that the petitioners' right to file appeals against the orders dated 19.10.2023 and 12.09.2023 cannot be taken away merely because they paid the demanded amount. The Court held that due to the respondent authorities' fault, the petitioners were unable to file appeals against those orders, and the petition was disposed of accordingly.
The High Court held that Section 129(5) of the State Act, which stipulates that upon payment of the entire amount pursuant to a notice u/s 129(3), all proceedings related to that notice shall be deemed concluded, applies only when the entire amount stated in the show cause notice is paid. However, it does not preclude the right to file an appeal against the order passed u/s 129(3) within the stipulated time. The Court opined that the petitioners' right to file appeals against the orders dated 19.10.2023 and 12.09.2023 cannot be taken away merely because they paid the demanded amount. The Court held that due to the respondent authorities' fault, the petitioners were unable to file appeals against those orders, and the petition was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
