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 dismissed a petition seeking recall of a bail order in a case involving fraudulent availing of Input Tax Credit through ineligible invoices. The court distinguished between challenging bail orders on merits versus cancellation for condition violations, noting that recall requires demonstrating improper exercise of discretion while cancellation involves breach of bail conditions. The petitioner failed to establish cogent and overwhelming circumstances necessary for bail cancellation. The court emphasized that evidence was documentary/electronic with no tampering risk, the accused posed no flight risk, and no witness influence concerns existed. Since the original bail order dated 17.10.2020 was well-reasoned and no misuse of bail liberty was demonstrated, the petition lacked merit and was dismissed.
The HC dismissed a petition seeking recall of a bail order in a case involving fraudulent availing of Input Tax Credit through ineligible invoices. The court distinguished between challenging bail orders on merits versus cancellation for condition violations, noting that recall requires demonstrating improper exercise of discretion while cancellation involves breach of bail conditions. The petitioner failed to establish cogent and overwhelming circumstances necessary for bail cancellation. The court emphasized that evidence was documentary/electronic with no tampering risk, the accused posed no flight risk, and no witness influence concerns existed. Since the original bail order dated 17.10.2020 was well-reasoned and no misuse of bail liberty was demonstrated, the petition lacked merit and was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
