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 upheld the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, due to non-filing of returns for six consecutive months. However, acknowledging the serious civil consequences of such cancellation, the court directed that the petitioner may apply for restoration of registration by submitting all pending returns and paying outstanding tax dues, interest, and late fees in accordance with the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017. The empowered officer retains jurisdiction to consider the restoration application and pass appropriate orders within the statutory framework. The petitioner was granted two months to approach the concerned authority for restoration. The writ petition was disposed of on these terms.
The HC upheld the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, due to non-filing of returns for six consecutive months. However, acknowledging the serious civil consequences of such cancellation, the court directed that the petitioner may apply for restoration of registration by submitting all pending returns and paying outstanding tax dues, interest, and late fees in accordance with the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017. The empowered officer retains jurisdiction to consider the restoration application and pass appropriate orders within the statutory framework. The petitioner was granted two months to approach the concerned authority for restoration. The writ petition was disposed of on these terms.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.