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 High Court allowed the appeals and set aside the impugned judgment of the Single Judge. The court held that to avail the Budgetary Support Scheme (BSS), the concerned unit must be located in the specified areas mentioned in the 2007 and 2017 notifications, producing specified goods cleared from the same units. The intent of the BSS pivoted around the geographical location of the unit, and the benefit was to accrue to those units for the residual period. Despite a change in name or acquisition of a new unit within Sikkim, there was no change in the geographical location of the units existing in Sikkim prior to the GST regime. The court observed that the appellants' anxiety regarding eligibility remained unaddressed, and no decision was taken by the DPIIT concerning their eligibility.
The High Court allowed the appeals and set aside the impugned judgment of the Single Judge. The court held that to avail the Budgetary Support Scheme (BSS), the concerned unit must be located in the specified areas mentioned in the 2007 and 2017 notifications, producing specified goods cleared from the same units. The intent of the BSS pivoted around the geographical location of the unit, and the benefit was to accrue to those units for the residual period. Despite a change in name or acquisition of a new unit within Sikkim, there was no change in the geographical location of the units existing in Sikkim prior to the GST regime. The court observed that the appellants' anxiety regarding eligibility remained unaddressed, and no decision was taken by the DPIIT concerning their eligibility.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
