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...
The HC set aside the appellate authority's order dismissing a GST appeal filed beyond the prescribed four-month limitation period under Section 107(4) of CGST Act, 2017. The Court held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies for condonation of delay in GST appeals, as it has not been expressly or impliedly excluded by Section 107 of the CGST Act. Following established precedent, the Court ruled that the appellate authority was unjustified in rejecting the appeal solely on limitation grounds without considering condonation of delay. The matter was remanded to the appellate authority for fresh consideration of the condonation application.
The HC set aside the appellate authority's order dismissing a GST appeal filed beyond the prescribed four-month limitation period under Section 107(4) of CGST Act, 2017. The Court held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies for condonation of delay in GST appeals, as it has not been expressly or impliedly excluded by Section 107 of the CGST Act. Following established precedent, the Court ruled that the appellate authority was unjustified in rejecting the appeal solely on limitation grounds without considering condonation of delay. The matter was remanded to the appellate authority for fresh consideration of the condonation application.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.