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...
In a prosecution alleging creation and operation of multiple firms to wrongfully avail and pass on input tax credit exceeding ₹30 crores under Section 132 of the CGST Act, the court assessed whether continued pre-trial custody was warranted. Noting that the maximum punishment is five years, that the allegations remained to be proved, that the accused had been in custody since May 2025, and that the prosecution evidence was primarily documentary/electronic reducing apprehension of interference, the court held that further incarceration would be disproportionate and offend Article 21 and the principle that bail is the rule absent extraordinary circumstances. Regular bail was granted subject to conditions. - HC
In a prosecution alleging creation and operation of multiple firms to wrongfully avail and pass on input tax credit exceeding ₹30 crores under Section 132 of the CGST Act, the court assessed whether continued pre-trial custody was warranted. Noting that the maximum punishment is five years, that the allegations remained to be proved, that the accused had been in custody since May 2025, and that the prosecution evidence was primarily documentary/electronic reducing apprehension of interference, the court held that further incarceration would be disproportionate and offend Article 21 and the principle that bail is the rule absent extraordinary circumstances. Regular bail was granted subject to conditions. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
