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 held that amendments to CGST and KGST Acts regarding deemed supply of services by clubs/associations to members are unconstitutional. The court determined that the principle of mutuality survives constitutional interpretation, and the retrospective amendments violate the Rule of Law. The statutory provisions improperly expanded the definition of "supply" and "service" without constitutional basis. The amendments were declared void, with the court emphasizing that legislative actions must respect fairness and cannot impose unexpected tax liabilities retrospectively. The judgment upholds the principle that taxation mechanisms cannot arbitrarily redefine fundamental legal concepts without appropriate constitutional amendments.
HC held that amendments to CGST and KGST Acts regarding deemed supply of services by clubs/associations to members are unconstitutional. The court determined that the principle of mutuality survives constitutional interpretation, and the retrospective amendments violate the Rule of Law. The statutory provisions improperly expanded the definition of "supply" and "service" without constitutional basis. The amendments were declared void, with the court emphasizing that legislative actions must respect fairness and cannot impose unexpected tax liabilities retrospectively. The judgment upholds the principle that taxation mechanisms cannot arbitrarily redefine fundamental legal concepts without appropriate constitutional amendments.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
