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 seizure of goods was unlawful where a valid e-way bill accompanied the consignment and remained uncancelled, demonstrating genuineness of transport documents and negating any demonstrable intent to evade tax. The absence of the shipping address as an additional place of business and omission of a consignor's official signature on the delivery challan did not, without more, establish culpable noncompliance justifying seizure. The court found that, given the valid e-way bill and accompanying documentation, departmental action amounted to unnecessary litigation and breached statutory safeguards; prior analogous authority supported quashing of such proceedings. The impugned orders were quashed and the petition allowed.
The HC held that seizure of goods was unlawful where a valid e-way bill accompanied the consignment and remained uncancelled, demonstrating genuineness of transport documents and negating any demonstrable intent to evade tax. The absence of the shipping address as an additional place of business and omission of a consignor's official signature on the delivery challan did not, without more, establish culpable noncompliance justifying seizure. The court found that, given the valid e-way bill and accompanying documentation, departmental action amounted to unnecessary litigation and breached statutory safeguards; prior analogous authority supported quashing of such proceedings. The impugned orders were quashed and the petition allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.