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...
HC examined validity of detention and seizure notice under GST Act Section 129(3). Referring to government circular dated 31-12-2018 defining ownership of goods through accompanying documents, court found petitioner was legitimate consignee per invoice for goods transported in truck CG 10 AJ 1477. Given established ownership through proper documentation, HC directed release of seized goods and vehicle to petitioner's interim custody subject to fulfillment of prescribed conditions. Court's ruling emphasized importance of documentary evidence in establishing goods ownership for GST detention cases, affirming petitioner's right to custody based on proper invoice documentation.
HC examined validity of detention and seizure notice under GST Act Section 129(3). Referring to government circular dated 31-12-2018 defining ownership of goods through accompanying documents, court found petitioner was legitimate consignee per invoice for goods transported in truck CG 10 AJ 1477. Given established ownership through proper documentation, HC directed release of seized goods and vehicle to petitioner's interim custody subject to fulfillment of prescribed conditions. Court's ruling emphasized importance of documentary evidence in establishing goods ownership for GST detention cases, affirming petitioner's right to custody based on proper invoice documentation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
