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...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable in view of alleged fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit and clandestine clearance of goods, holding that writ jurisdiction is ordinarily inappropriate where complex factual investigations, voluminous evidence and potential prejudice to the exchequer and the GST regime are involved. The Court relegated the Petitioner to statutory appellate remedies, observed that large-scale ITC claims or GST evasion should be ventilated on appeal, and permitted the Petitioner to file an appeal against the impugned order by 30 November 2025 with the requisite pre-deposit in accordance with law. Petition disposed.
The HC dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable in view of alleged fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit and clandestine clearance of goods, holding that writ jurisdiction is ordinarily inappropriate where complex factual investigations, voluminous evidence and potential prejudice to the exchequer and the GST regime are involved. The Court relegated the Petitioner to statutory appellate remedies, observed that large-scale ITC claims or GST evasion should be ventilated on appeal, and permitted the Petitioner to file an appeal against the impugned order by 30 November 2025 with the requisite pre-deposit in accordance with law. Petition disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
