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 dismissed the writ petition, holding that Section 74(10) requires the impugned order to be issued within the limitation period but not the subsequent DRC-07, which is a post-order electronic summary under Rule 142; deemed service under Section 169 (including electronic communication) suffices for issuance. The court recognised Section 74's extended period applies only where fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression is established and found the investigation prima facie disclosed alleged fraudulent ITC availment. The Petitioner was granted leave to file an appeal under Section 107 by 30 September 2025 with the requisite pre-deposit; if so filed timely, the Appellate Authority shall determine it on merits, not on limitation.
The HC dismissed the writ petition, holding that Section 74(10) requires the impugned order to be issued within the limitation period but not the subsequent DRC-07, which is a post-order electronic summary under Rule 142; deemed service under Section 169 (including electronic communication) suffices for issuance. The court recognised Section 74's extended period applies only where fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression is established and found the investigation prima facie disclosed alleged fraudulent ITC availment. The Petitioner was granted leave to file an appeal under Section 107 by 30 September 2025 with the requisite pre-deposit; if so filed timely, the Appellate Authority shall determine it on merits, not on limitation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
