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 quashed the detention and penalty orders under section 129 of the GST Act due to the absence of intent to evade tax. Although the e-way bill omitted the transporter's name, the truck number and other details were provided, and the goods were transported within Delhi as per the tax invoice and e-way bill. The Court found no evidence of tax evasion or misrepresentation, noting the appellant's unchallenged claim that the goods were transported as a full truckload to its warehouse. Consequently, the penalty proceedings lacked justification. Both the original and appellate orders impugned were set aside, and the petition was allowed.
The HC quashed the detention and penalty orders under section 129 of the GST Act due to the absence of intent to evade tax. Although the e-way bill omitted the transporter's name, the truck number and other details were provided, and the goods were transported within Delhi as per the tax invoice and e-way bill. The Court found no evidence of tax evasion or misrepresentation, noting the appellant's unchallenged claim that the goods were transported as a full truckload to its warehouse. Consequently, the penalty proceedings lacked justification. Both the original and appellate orders impugned were set aside, and the petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.