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 held that under Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act, the secured creditor possesses priority over the secured asset concerning recovery of dues. Since the secured creditor had not taken possession of the property, the CGST authorities were justified in attaching the asset. Despite the admitted outstanding dues owed to both the CGST authorities and the secured creditor, the court allowed the secured creditor to proceed with enforcement against the secured asset. The ruling clarified that the CGST authorities' right to recover dues is subordinate to the secured creditor's interests, who must maintain transparent accounting and share transaction details with the CGST authorities. The court referred to established precedent confirming that statutory dues under other enactments, such as the MSMED Act, do not confer similar priority rights. The petition was accordingly disposed of.
The HC held that under Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act, the secured creditor possesses priority over the secured asset concerning recovery of dues. Since the secured creditor had not taken possession of the property, the CGST authorities were justified in attaching the asset. Despite the admitted outstanding dues owed to both the CGST authorities and the secured creditor, the court allowed the secured creditor to proceed with enforcement against the secured asset. The ruling clarified that the CGST authorities' right to recover dues is subordinate to the secured creditor's interests, who must maintain transparent accounting and share transaction details with the CGST authorities. The court referred to established precedent confirming that statutory dues under other enactments, such as the MSMED Act, do not confer similar priority rights. The petition was accordingly disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
