Permanent-establishment reassessment cannot revisit scrutinised disclosures; extended reopening fails without undisclosed material facts and within st...
Modified returns after business reorganisation must be assessed within pending proceedings, barring parallel scrutiny and consequential transfer prici...
HC granted ad-interim relief to petitioners challenging retrospective application of penalty under Section 122(1A). The court found a prima facie case exists, noting the statutory provision was enacted on 1 January 2021 but sought to impose penalties for period prior to enforcement (July 2017 to December 2020). The court's interim order suggests substantial merit in petitioners' arguments, referencing a prior judicial precedent. Balance of convenience favors petitioners, indicating potential procedural irregularity in retrospective penalty imposition. Petition disposed with interim relief granted.
HC granted ad-interim relief to petitioners challenging retrospective application of penalty under Section 122(1A). The court found a prima facie case exists, noting the statutory provision was enacted on 1 January 2021 but sought to impose penalties for period prior to enforcement (July 2017 to December 2020). The court's interim order suggests substantial merit in petitioners' arguments, referencing a prior judicial precedent. Balance of convenience favors petitioners, indicating potential procedural irregularity in retrospective penalty imposition. Petition disposed with interim relief granted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4908 
