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...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
The High Court held that the respondent (DRI) had jurisdiction to issue the show cause notice under the Customs Act, 1962, following the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Customs vs. Canon India Pvt. Ltd. The petition was disposed of by restoring the notice to the Adjudicating Authority for adjudication by a proper officer u/s 28 of the Customs Act, 1962.
The High Court held that the respondent (DRI) had jurisdiction to issue the show cause notice under the Customs Act, 1962, following the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Customs vs. Canon India Pvt. Ltd. The petition was disposed of by restoring the notice to the Adjudicating Authority for adjudication by a proper officer u/s 28 of the Customs Act, 1962.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
