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 respondent resorted to profiteering by not passing on the benefit of GST rate reduction on cinema tickets, realizing an additional Rs. 4,65,549 from recipients. As per Rule 133, the respondent is directed to reduce ticket prices commensurate with the tax cut, deposit the profiteered amount of Rs. 4,65,549 plus 18% interest equally in central and state consumer welfare funds within 3 months. The respondent violated Section 171(1) by denying rate cut benefit, but penalty u/s 171(3A) cannot be imposed retrospectively. The jurisdictional GST commissioners are directed to monitor compliance and report to the commission within 4 months.
The respondent resorted to profiteering by not passing on the benefit of GST rate reduction on cinema tickets, realizing an additional Rs. 4,65,549 from recipients. As per Rule 133, the respondent is directed to reduce ticket prices commensurate with the tax cut, deposit the profiteered amount of Rs. 4,65,549 plus 18% interest equally in central and state consumer welfare funds within 3 months. The respondent violated Section 171(1) by denying rate cut benefit, but penalty u/s 171(3A) cannot be imposed retrospectively. The jurisdictional GST commissioners are directed to monitor compliance and report to the commission within 4 months.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
