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 appellate tribunal held that there was no dispute regarding the transferability of the DFRC license. The appellants were unaware of the license holder after selling it, and it was the buyer's responsibility to register at the port of export and apply for Telegraphic Release Advice (TRA) as per the relevant public notice. The facts did not establish any mischief or wrongdoing by the appellants concerning the alleged change claimed by the revenue authorities. Since the appellants' role was unclear, imposing a penalty on them was not in accordance with the law. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, the penalty imposed on the appellants was deleted, and the appeal was allowed.
The appellate tribunal held that there was no dispute regarding the transferability of the DFRC license. The appellants were unaware of the license holder after selling it, and it was the buyer's responsibility to register at the port of export and apply for Telegraphic Release Advice (TRA) as per the relevant public notice. The facts did not establish any mischief or wrongdoing by the appellants concerning the alleged change claimed by the revenue authorities. Since the appellants' role was unclear, imposing a penalty on them was not in accordance with the law. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, the penalty imposed on the appellants was deleted, and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
