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 GST-ASMT-10 notices issued under Section 61 of Jharkhand GST Act, 2017 comparing petitioners' stone-boulder sales price with market price are ultra vires and without jurisdiction. The court determined that merely selling goods at a lower than market price does not automatically constitute a taxable discrepancy. The notices were deemed improper as they exceeded statutory powers, and the court quashed the notices, effectively ruling in favor of the petitioners by invalidating the tax department's assessment approach.
HC held that GST-ASMT-10 notices issued under Section 61 of Jharkhand GST Act, 2017 comparing petitioners' stone-boulder sales price with market price are ultra vires and without jurisdiction. The court determined that merely selling goods at a lower than market price does not automatically constitute a taxable discrepancy. The notices were deemed improper as they exceeded statutory powers, and the court quashed the notices, effectively ruling in favor of the petitioners by invalidating the tax department's assessment approach.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.