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...
Existence of an efficacious statutory appeal under the CGST Act justified refusal of writ jurisdiction against GST adjudication orders passed by municipal bodies. The Court found that the challenge was not a case of lack of jurisdiction, because the alleged GST immunity depended on examination of the underlying transactions and the adjudicating authority had already undertaken that factual exercise. As no exceptional circumstance, including a vires challenge, was shown, the petitioners were relegated to the appellate remedy. Appeals filed within the time granted and with statutory compliances were to be heard on merits without objection on limitation, and all substantive contentions were left open.
Existence of an efficacious statutory appeal under the CGST Act justified refusal of writ jurisdiction against GST adjudication orders passed by municipal bodies. The Court found that the challenge was not a case of lack of jurisdiction, because the alleged GST immunity depended on examination of the underlying transactions and the adjudicating authority had already undertaken that factual exercise. As no exceptional circumstance, including a vires challenge, was shown, the petitioners were relegated to the appellate remedy. Appeals filed within the time granted and with statutory compliances were to be heard on merits without objection on limitation, and all substantive contentions were left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
