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 unreasoned order rejecting the petitioner's fresh GST registration application, finding that the Proper Officer failed to record requisite findings under Section 29(2)(b) and (c) of the CGST Act. The Court noted the petitioner had remedies available for revocation of cancellation and appeal but chose to file a fresh application, which is not barred by statute. The rejection order lacked reference to the statutory provisions and did not comply with the circular's requirements. Consequently, the matter was remitted to the Deputy Commissioner for fresh consideration of the registration application in accordance with law. The petitioner's application was allowed by way of remand.
The HC set aside the unreasoned order rejecting the petitioner's fresh GST registration application, finding that the Proper Officer failed to record requisite findings under Section 29(2)(b) and (c) of the CGST Act. The Court noted the petitioner had remedies available for revocation of cancellation and appeal but chose to file a fresh application, which is not barred by statute. The rejection order lacked reference to the statutory provisions and did not comply with the circular's requirements. Consequently, the matter was remitted to the Deputy Commissioner for fresh consideration of the registration application in accordance with law. The petitioner's application was allowed by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
