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 set aside assessment order dated 08.08.2024 for violating principles of natural justice where petitioner received no personal hearing opportunity. Despite show cause notice being uploaded on GST Portal, petitioner claimed unawareness and non-receipt of original notice. Court held that while portal service is valid, revenue officers must explore alternative service modes under Section 169 GST Act when taxpayers remain unresponsive, preferably through RPAD, to ensure effective service rather than mere procedural compliance. Matter remanded to respondent for fresh consideration conditional upon petitioner depositing 25% of disputed tax amount within four weeks. Petition allowed by way of remand.
HC set aside assessment order dated 08.08.2024 for violating principles of natural justice where petitioner received no personal hearing opportunity. Despite show cause notice being uploaded on GST Portal, petitioner claimed unawareness and non-receipt of original notice. Court held that while portal service is valid, revenue officers must explore alternative service modes under Section 169 GST Act when taxpayers remain unresponsive, preferably through RPAD, to ensure effective service rather than mere procedural compliance. Matter remanded to respondent for fresh consideration conditional upon petitioner depositing 25% of disputed tax amount within four weeks. Petition allowed by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
