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 HC held that the impugned order u/s 129 of the Odisha GST Act, 2017 was not timely. Despite the petitioner's appeal mentioning 27.09.2024 as the order date, the HC found the order was made on the 8th day from the notice specifying penalty, violating Section 129(3). Consequently, the order was set aside and quashed, and the petition was disposed of.
The HC held that the impugned order u/s 129 of the Odisha GST Act, 2017 was not timely. Despite the petitioner's appeal mentioning 27.09.2024 as the order date, the HC found the order was made on the 8th day from the notice specifying penalty, violating Section 129(3). Consequently, the order was set aside and quashed, and the petition was disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.