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...
The HC set aside an ex-parte order issued without proper service of show cause notice, finding it violated principles of natural justice. Following precedents established in Ola Fleet Technologies and Akriti Food Industry cases, the Court determined that taxpayers facing liability must receive opportunity to present their defense. Rather than prolonging litigation, the HC directed that the impugned order dated 30.12.2023 should be treated as notice under Section 73 of the GST Act, 2017, allowing the petitioner to file objections and submit relevant documentation to the assessing officer for fresh consideration. The petition was accordingly disposed of with directions for the assessing authority to pass a fresh order after considering the petitioner's submissions.
The HC set aside an ex-parte order issued without proper service of show cause notice, finding it violated principles of natural justice. Following precedents established in Ola Fleet Technologies and Akriti Food Industry cases, the Court determined that taxpayers facing liability must receive opportunity to present their defense. Rather than prolonging litigation, the HC directed that the impugned order dated 30.12.2023 should be treated as notice under Section 73 of the GST Act, 2017, allowing the petitioner to file objections and submit relevant documentation to the assessing officer for fresh consideration. The petition was accordingly disposed of with directions for the assessing authority to pass a fresh order after considering the petitioner's submissions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
