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...
Breach of principles of natural justice occurred due to lack of proper service of show cause notice (SCN). The impugned order and preceding notices were uploaded on the GST portal but not communicated through other modes. There was a mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 3B returns and auto-populated GSTR 2A. The High Court held that since the petitioner could not participate due to unawareness of proceedings, the interest of justice warrants providing an opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits after remitting 10% of the disputed tax demand within two weeks. The impugned order was set aside on this condition, and the petitioner was permitted to submit a reply to the SCN within the said period. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Breach of principles of natural justice occurred due to lack of proper service of show cause notice (SCN). The impugned order and preceding notices were uploaded on the GST portal but not communicated through other modes. There was a mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 3B returns and auto-populated GSTR 2A. The High Court held that since the petitioner could not participate due to unawareness of proceedings, the interest of justice warrants providing an opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits after remitting 10% of the disputed tax demand within two weeks. The impugned order was set aside on this condition, and the petitioner was permitted to submit a reply to the SCN within the said period. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
