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 the petition is not maintainable insofar as the petitioner failed to show that the officer exercising Section 129(3) of the CGST Act lacked jurisdiction or that "specifying the penalty payable" requires assessment of goods and valuation prior to its specification; prima facie the petitioner did not cooperate in proceedings under Section 129. The writ petition is disposed of with the petitioner directed to exhaust the remedy of appeal before the appellate authority within one month of receipt of the order. The appellate authority is requested to decide the memorandum of appeal within a reasonable period, namely three months from receipt. No stay was granted.
The HC held that the petition is not maintainable insofar as the petitioner failed to show that the officer exercising Section 129(3) of the CGST Act lacked jurisdiction or that "specifying the penalty payable" requires assessment of goods and valuation prior to its specification; prima facie the petitioner did not cooperate in proceedings under Section 129. The writ petition is disposed of with the petitioner directed to exhaust the remedy of appeal before the appellate authority within one month of receipt of the order. The appellate authority is requested to decide the memorandum of appeal within a reasonable period, namely three months from receipt. No stay was granted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
