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 found the refund claim for unutilized input tax credit time-barred u/s 54. The court interpreted Section 54(1) and 54(3) to establish that while refund claims can be initiated from the end of the relevant tax period, there exists a two-year limitation period from the relevant date. The petitioner's application filed on 21.03.2024 exceeded the statutory deadline of 09.03.2024. The court emphasized that Section 54(3) determines the starting point for refund claims, while Section 54(1) sets the outer time limit of two years. Given the clear statutory framework and the petitioner's failure to file within prescribed time limits, the petition was dismissed.
HC found the refund claim for unutilized input tax credit time-barred u/s 54. The court interpreted Section 54(1) and 54(3) to establish that while refund claims can be initiated from the end of the relevant tax period, there exists a two-year limitation period from the relevant date. The petitioner's application filed on 21.03.2024 exceeded the statutory deadline of 09.03.2024. The court emphasized that Section 54(3) determines the starting point for refund claims, while Section 54(1) sets the outer time limit of two years. Given the clear statutory framework and the petitioner's failure to file within prescribed time limits, the petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
