Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
HC quashed reassessment where the reopening was founded on a GST cancellation order that had already been reversed in appeal. The Court noted that the appellate GST order found no fraudulent ITC claim, no violation attracting adjudication, and no basis for the cancellation. The income-tax authority also failed to consider that appellate material, despite its direct relevance to the alleged escapement of income. With no independent material beyond the set-aside GST action, the initiation of reassessment was unwarranted. The order under Section 148A(3) and the consequential notice under Section 148 were set aside.
HC quashed reassessment where the reopening was founded on a GST cancellation order that had already been reversed in appeal. The Court noted that the appellate GST order found no fraudulent ITC claim, no violation attracting adjudication, and no basis for the cancellation. The income-tax authority also failed to consider that appellate material, despite its direct relevance to the alleged escapement of income. With no independent material beyond the set-aside GST action, the initiation of reassessment was unwarranted. The order under Section 148A(3) and the consequential notice under Section 148 were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
