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 invalidated provisional attachment of petitioner's bank account under Section 83 of MGST Act 2017. Court emphasized the draconian nature of provisional attachment powers, requiring strict fulfillment of statutory conditions and proper formation of Commissioner's opinion to protect revenue interests. The Joint Commissioner's order failed to demonstrate adequate material basis for concluding petitioner would defeat potential tax demands. The mere reference to GST Council's recommended amendment regarding "plant and machinery" terminology in Section 17(5)(d) was insufficient justification. Court found the attachment unjustified due to lack of substantive reasoning and evidentiary support. Petition disposed of with attachment order quashed.
HC invalidated provisional attachment of petitioner's bank account under Section 83 of MGST Act 2017. Court emphasized the draconian nature of provisional attachment powers, requiring strict fulfillment of statutory conditions and proper formation of Commissioner's opinion to protect revenue interests. The Joint Commissioner's order failed to demonstrate adequate material basis for concluding petitioner would defeat potential tax demands. The mere reference to GST Council's recommended amendment regarding "plant and machinery" terminology in Section 17(5)(d) was insufficient justification. Court found the attachment unjustified due to lack of substantive reasoning and evidentiary support. Petition disposed of with attachment order quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
