Penny-stock additions require transaction-specific evidence; general investigation material alone cannot establish undisclosed income or accommodation...
Transfer pricing comparability prioritises reliable external CUPs and foreign-currency LIBOR benchmarks for exports, borrowings and delayed receivable...
Section 153C satisfaction and seized electronic records sustained unexplained-investment addition, subject to proportionate ownership-share verificati...
HC, exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226, examined a challenge to a demand order and SCN issued under the GST Act, 2017. It held that, under Section 75(7) read with Section 74(9), the final order cannot demand tax, interest or penalty in excess of, or on grounds different from, those specified in the SCN. In the present case, the impugned order under Section 74(9) demanded an amount far exceeding that in the SCN, violating Section 75(7) and principles of natural justice. Consequently, the impugned order and consequential demand were quashed and the petition allowed.
HC, exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226, examined a challenge to a demand order and SCN issued under the GST Act, 2017. It held that, under Section 75(7) read with Section 74(9), the final order cannot demand tax, interest or penalty in excess of, or on grounds different from, those specified in the SCN. In the present case, the impugned order under Section 74(9) demanded an amount far exceeding that in the SCN, violating Section 75(7) and principles of natural justice. Consequently, the impugned order and consequential demand were quashed and the petition allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
