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 Kerala HC held that provisional release of goods is permissible u/s 67(6) of the GST Act even after initiation of proceedings u/s 130. The adjudication can proceed even if goods are released pending adjudication. Section 130(7) provides an option to pay fine in lieu of confiscation after adjudication, protecting revenue interest. Provisional release does not result in loss of absolute custody by the Department over seized goods as it retains constructive custody. The object is to secure the value of goods liable for confiscation, not confiscation itself.
The Kerala HC held that provisional release of goods is permissible u/s 67(6) of the GST Act even after initiation of proceedings u/s 130. The adjudication can proceed even if goods are released pending adjudication. Section 130(7) provides an option to pay fine in lieu of confiscation after adjudication, protecting revenue interest. Provisional release does not result in loss of absolute custody by the Department over seized goods as it retains constructive custody. The object is to secure the value of goods liable for confiscation, not confiscation itself.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.