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 quashed the order demanding interest and penalty from the petitioner company on delayed payment of excise duty. The petitioner had voluntarily paid the duty after a Central Government audit. However, the authorities failed to issue a show cause notice and provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before imposing interest and penalty u/ss 11AA and 11AC of the Excise Act. The HC held that a speaking order was required after considering the petitioner's defense on whether the duty payment was actually delayed and if voluntary deposit entitled it to benefit. As the mandatory procedure was not followed, the demand of interest and penalty was unsustainable.
The HC quashed the order demanding interest and penalty from the petitioner company on delayed payment of excise duty. The petitioner had voluntarily paid the duty after a Central Government audit. However, the authorities failed to issue a show cause notice and provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before imposing interest and penalty u/ss 11AA and 11AC of the Excise Act. The HC held that a speaking order was required after considering the petitioner's defense on whether the duty payment was actually delayed and if voluntary deposit entitled it to benefit. As the mandatory procedure was not followed, the demand of interest and penalty was unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
