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 the writ petition challenging the order issued under section 73 of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017, on grounds of alleged violation of natural justice. The court held that the petitioner was granted an opportunity of hearing but failed to appear, distinguishing non-appearance from denial of hearing. The petitioner's claim of seeking additional time was found insufficient as the hearing date was already fixed. The court ruled that the alleged procedural lapse did not amount to a violation of natural justice. Disputes regarding the merits of the order fall within statutory remedies, which the petitioner was liberty to pursue. Consequently, the petition was dismissed while preserving the petitioner's right to statutory recourse.
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the order issued under section 73 of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017, on grounds of alleged violation of natural justice. The court held that the petitioner was granted an opportunity of hearing but failed to appear, distinguishing non-appearance from denial of hearing. The petitioner's claim of seeking additional time was found insufficient as the hearing date was already fixed. The court ruled that the alleged procedural lapse did not amount to a violation of natural justice. Disputes regarding the merits of the order fall within statutory remedies, which the petitioner was liberty to pursue. Consequently, the petition was dismissed while preserving the petitioner's right to statutory recourse.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
