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 detention of goods and penalties imposed for missing e-tax invoice were unjustified. While physical tax invoice, e-way bill, and bilty accompanied the goods with accurate descriptions and quantities, the e-tax invoice was absent due to technical issues with GST portal. The authorities failed to establish any intent to evade tax payments. The petitioner's explanation regarding technical glitch remained undisputed. Following precedents where deficiencies noted in show cause notices were rectified before detention orders, the court held that penalties were unwarranted when no tax evasion was proven. The impugned order was set aside and the petition was allowed, establishing that technical non-compliance without fraudulent intent does not merit punitive action.
HC determined that detention of goods and penalties imposed for missing e-tax invoice were unjustified. While physical tax invoice, e-way bill, and bilty accompanied the goods with accurate descriptions and quantities, the e-tax invoice was absent due to technical issues with GST portal. The authorities failed to establish any intent to evade tax payments. The petitioner's explanation regarding technical glitch remained undisputed. Following precedents where deficiencies noted in show cause notices were rectified before detention orders, the court held that penalties were unwarranted when no tax evasion was proven. The impugned order was set aside and the petition was allowed, establishing that technical non-compliance without fraudulent intent does not merit punitive action.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.