Regulatory consolidation for investment advisers: SEBI issues master circular consolidating guidance and prescribing compliance, reporting, fees and s...
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...
An adjudication order confirming a demand under a show cause notice cannot stand where the authority fails to consider the taxpayer's replies and gives no cogent reasons for rejection. The High Court found complete non-application of mind because the order relied on an unexplained assumption that the matter was sub judice on merits, did not identify the supplies treated as taxable or tax-free after considering the circulars cited, and omitted discussion of all replies. The impugned order was quashed, with liberty to proceed afresh on the notice after considering all replies and granting a fresh hearing.
An adjudication order confirming a demand under a show cause notice cannot stand where the authority fails to consider the taxpayer's replies and gives no cogent reasons for rejection. The High Court found complete non-application of mind because the order relied on an unexplained assumption that the matter was sub judice on merits, did not identify the supplies treated as taxable or tax-free after considering the circulars cited, and omitted discussion of all replies. The impugned order was quashed, with liberty to proceed afresh on the notice after considering all replies and granting a fresh hearing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
