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 dismissed the writ petition challenging the validity of show cause notice issued under CGST Act Section 122(1A). The court held that mere issuance of SCN does not infringe any rights and writ petition is premature without final adjudication order. Following established SC precedent, HC refused to interfere at preliminary stage, emphasizing that petitioner retains liberty to contest validity of proceedings before adjudicating authority. Court noted petitioner may file appropriate application for cross-examination of witnesses before competent authority in accordance with law. The petition was disposed of with directions that all grounds including natural justice violations may be raised during adjudication proceedings.
HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the validity of show cause notice issued under CGST Act Section 122(1A). The court held that mere issuance of SCN does not infringe any rights and writ petition is premature without final adjudication order. Following established SC precedent, HC refused to interfere at preliminary stage, emphasizing that petitioner retains liberty to contest validity of proceedings before adjudicating authority. Court noted petitioner may file appropriate application for cross-examination of witnesses before competent authority in accordance with law. The petition was disposed of with directions that all grounds including natural justice violations may be raised during adjudication proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
