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 the cancellation of GST registration invalid due to procedural deficiencies. The show cause notice (SCN) merely cited Rule 21(b) of CGST Rules 2017 without specifying material violations, preventing adequate response from the registrant. Despite the registrant's explanation of bank-verified invoices, the assessing authority failed to provide reasoned consideration of the response. The authority's single-line cancellation order, lacking substantive examination of the reply, was deemed insufficient to justify registration cancellation. The court emphasized that mere citation of legal provisions without detailed violation particulars and failure to provide reasoned orders violates principles of natural justice. The petition was allowed, invalidating the registration cancellation.
HC determined the cancellation of GST registration invalid due to procedural deficiencies. The show cause notice (SCN) merely cited Rule 21(b) of CGST Rules 2017 without specifying material violations, preventing adequate response from the registrant. Despite the registrant's explanation of bank-verified invoices, the assessing authority failed to provide reasoned consideration of the response. The authority's single-line cancellation order, lacking substantive examination of the reply, was deemed insufficient to justify registration cancellation. The court emphasized that mere citation of legal provisions without detailed violation particulars and failure to provide reasoned orders violates principles of natural justice. The petition was allowed, invalidating the registration cancellation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.