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...
Challenge concerns taxability of ocean freight under the IGST reverse charge mechanism and rejection of a rectification application. The court found the Proper Officer erred in treating a Supreme Court decision as prospective where constitutional precedent requires judgments to operate retrospectively unless expressly prospective, and concluded the SC ruling that Notification 10/2017 is clarificatory (not altering the taxable person under reverse charge) governs earlier import transactions; therefore the impugned confirmation of IGST demand and the March 25, 2025 rejection of rectification could not be sustained and the rectification application was allowed.
Challenge concerns taxability of ocean freight under the IGST reverse charge mechanism and rejection of a rectification application. The court found the Proper Officer erred in treating a Supreme Court decision as prospective where constitutional precedent requires judgments to operate retrospectively unless expressly prospective, and concluded the SC ruling that Notification 10/2017 is clarificatory (not altering the taxable person under reverse charge) governs earlier import transactions; therefore the impugned confirmation of IGST demand and the March 25, 2025 rejection of rectification could not be sustained and the rectification application was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
