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...
An assessment under Section 73 of the Tamil Nadu GST Act was set aside because the assessing authority did not adequately consider the assessee's documentary evidence on mismatch, alleged hypothetical supplies and double taxation. The court noted that the dispute depended on verification and reconciliation of the supporting material already stated to have been filed, so the proper course was to allow the assessee to file an additional reply and documents item-wise before the original authority. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration and correct determination of liability after granting that opportunity.
An assessment under Section 73 of the Tamil Nadu GST Act was set aside because the assessing authority did not adequately consider the assessee's documentary evidence on mismatch, alleged hypothetical supplies and double taxation. The court noted that the dispute depended on verification and reconciliation of the supporting material already stated to have been filed, so the proper course was to allow the assessee to file an additional reply and documents item-wise before the original authority. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration and correct determination of liability after granting that opportunity.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.