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 service of notice by uploading on the portal constitutes valid service under Section 169(1)(d) of WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. The court rejected the contention that personal service was mandatory, finding that the petitioner was aware of the proceedings and had responded to the show-cause notice. The appellate authority's mechanical rejection of the appeal for delay was deemed incorrect, following precedent that allows condonation beyond the extended one-month period. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the petition was disposed of, affirming a more flexible interpretation of service and delay condonation provisions.
HC held that service of notice by uploading on the portal constitutes valid service under Section 169(1)(d) of WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. The court rejected the contention that personal service was mandatory, finding that the petitioner was aware of the proceedings and had responded to the show-cause notice. The appellate authority's mechanical rejection of the appeal for delay was deemed incorrect, following precedent that allows condonation beyond the extended one-month period. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the petition was disposed of, affirming a more flexible interpretation of service and delay condonation provisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.