Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
Disallowance of input tax credit was challenged on the ground that proceedings under Section 73 were initiated only against the recipient without first following the statutory mechanism under Section 42 against the suppliers. The Court held that Section 42(3) mandates issuance of a discrepancy notice to both supplier and recipient, and Section 42(5) permits fastening output tax liability on the recipient only if, after such communication, the supplier fails to rectify the discrepancy in the prescribed return. Since no proceedings/notices were initiated against the suppliers before issuing the show cause notice to the recipient, the notice was without jurisdiction and was quashed, with liberty to proceed against the suppliers. - HC
Disallowance of input tax credit was challenged on the ground that proceedings under Section 73 were initiated only against the recipient without first following the statutory mechanism under Section 42 against the suppliers. The Court held that Section 42(3) mandates issuance of a discrepancy notice to both supplier and recipient, and Section 42(5) permits fastening output tax liability on the recipient only if, after such communication, the supplier fails to rectify the discrepancy in the prescribed return. Since no proceedings/notices were initiated against the suppliers before issuing the show cause notice to the recipient, the notice was without jurisdiction and was quashed, with liberty to proceed against the suppliers. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
