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 issuance of a single show cause notice encompassing multiple financial years contravenes the GST Act, which mandates that show cause notices must correspond to individual tax periods as defined under Section 2(106) and Sections 73/74. The Court emphasized that "bunching" violates principles of natural justice and statutory provisions, as each financial year constitutes a separate tax period. Furthermore, Section 128's provision for waiver schemes cannot justify pre-notification notices aggregating multiple years, as this imposes undue hardship on taxpayers. The Court clarified that show cause notices must be issued either based on annual returns after their filing or on monthly returns if issued prior to annual return submission. Accordingly, the petition challenging the validity of the multi-year show cause notice was allowed, reinforcing strict adherence to the statutory time limitation and procedural safeguards under the GST Act.
The HC held that issuance of a single show cause notice encompassing multiple financial years contravenes the GST Act, which mandates that show cause notices must correspond to individual tax periods as defined under Section 2(106) and Sections 73/74. The Court emphasized that "bunching" violates principles of natural justice and statutory provisions, as each financial year constitutes a separate tax period. Furthermore, Section 128's provision for waiver schemes cannot justify pre-notification notices aggregating multiple years, as this imposes undue hardship on taxpayers. The Court clarified that show cause notices must be issued either based on annual returns after their filing or on monthly returns if issued prior to annual return submission. Accordingly, the petition challenging the validity of the multi-year show cause notice was allowed, reinforcing strict adherence to the statutory time limitation and procedural safeguards under the GST Act.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
