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 determined that utilizing Input Tax Credit (ITC) available in IGST under CGST and SGST heads does not constitute improper availment warranting penalties. The electronic credit ledger functions as a wallet with separate compartments for IGST, CGST, and SGST. Despite petitioner's pending appeal, HC exercised jurisdiction under Article 226 to set aside the assessment order, finding that the method of ITC utilization was legitimate. The Court directed proper officer to reconsider the assessment, emphasizing that cross-utilization between different tax heads within the electronic credit ledger is permissible and does not attract penalties. Petition allowed with assessment order set aside for reconsideration.
HC determined that utilizing Input Tax Credit (ITC) available in IGST under CGST and SGST heads does not constitute improper availment warranting penalties. The electronic credit ledger functions as a wallet with separate compartments for IGST, CGST, and SGST. Despite petitioner's pending appeal, HC exercised jurisdiction under Article 226 to set aside the assessment order, finding that the method of ITC utilization was legitimate. The Court directed proper officer to reconsider the assessment, emphasizing that cross-utilization between different tax heads within the electronic credit ledger is permissible and does not attract penalties. Petition allowed with assessment order set aside for reconsideration.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
