Transfer pricing comparables and adjustments: Tribunal revisits loss-maker status, segmental comparability, working capital relief, and risk allocatio...
Business expenditure disallowance failed where commission, related-party salary and promotion payments were supported by records and inquiry was inade...
HC held that a minor discrepancy in e-way bill invoice number (3096 instead of 3063) does not warrant penalty proceedings under Section 129. The record confirmed no substantive differences in goods' quality, quantity, or items between accompanying documents. Referencing administrative circular guidance, the court determined the technical error was immaterial. The entire penalty proceedings were deemed legally unsustainable, and the petition was accordingly allowed, effectively quashing the punitive action against the transporter.
HC held that a minor discrepancy in e-way bill invoice number (3096 instead of 3063) does not warrant penalty proceedings under Section 129. The record confirmed no substantive differences in goods' quality, quantity, or items between accompanying documents. Referencing administrative circular guidance, the court determined the technical error was immaterial. The entire penalty proceedings were deemed legally unsustainable, and the petition was accordingly allowed, effectively quashing the punitive action against the transporter.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
