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...
HC held that the appellate authority erred in dismissing the appeal as time-barred without ascertaining the actual date of uploading/communication of the order passed under s.74 on the GST portal. The authority's reliance on a general assumption that orders are reflected "in no time" at the registered taxpayer's end, without any specific inquiry or material to disprove the petitioner's assertion of receipt on 25.08.2022, was found unsustainable. HC observed that only the department could access the precise upload data and was obliged to verify it. Consequently, the impugned appellate order dated 23.05.2023 was quashed, and the matter was remanded to the appellate authority for fresh consideration on limitation and merits. Petition allowed by remand.
HC held that the appellate authority erred in dismissing the appeal as time-barred without ascertaining the actual date of uploading/communication of the order passed under s.74 on the GST portal. The authority's reliance on a general assumption that orders are reflected "in no time" at the registered taxpayer's end, without any specific inquiry or material to disprove the petitioner's assertion of receipt on 25.08.2022, was found unsustainable. HC observed that only the department could access the precise upload data and was obliged to verify it. Consequently, the impugned appellate order dated 23.05.2023 was quashed, and the matter was remanded to the appellate authority for fresh consideration on limitation and merits. Petition allowed by remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
