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 court held that the impugned order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice as no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to passing the order, contrary to Section 75(4) of the GST Act. The court directed the respondent authority to consider the petitioner's replies, issue a 14-day notice for personal hearing, and pass appropriate orders on merits after hearing the petitioner. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration. The petition was disposed of by way of remand.
The court held that the impugned order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice as no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to passing the order, contrary to Section 75(4) of the GST Act. The court directed the respondent authority to consider the petitioner's replies, issue a 14-day notice for personal hearing, and pass appropriate orders on merits after hearing the petitioner. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration. The petition was disposed of by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.