Transfer pricing comparables and adjustments: Tribunal revisits loss-maker status, segmental comparability, working capital relief, and risk allocatio...
Business expenditure disallowance failed where commission, related-party salary and promotion payments were supported by records and inquiry was inade...
Under the GST regime, intelligence-based enforcement may be initiated by either Central or State tax authorities even where the taxpayer is registered with the other administration, so the State authority's jurisdiction to begin proceedings and issue orders was upheld. Classification disputes and objections to invocation of Section 74 involved disputed factual questions and were not entertained in writ jurisdiction under Article 226. Those grounds, including the plea that the reply was not properly considered, were held to be matters for statutory appeal, and the writ petitions were dismissed with liberty to appeal.
Under the GST regime, intelligence-based enforcement may be initiated by either Central or State tax authorities even where the taxpayer is registered with the other administration, so the State authority's jurisdiction to begin proceedings and issue orders was upheld. Classification disputes and objections to invocation of Section 74 involved disputed factual questions and were not entertained in writ jurisdiction under Article 226. Those grounds, including the plea that the reply was not properly considered, were held to be matters for statutory appeal, and the writ petitions were dismissed with liberty to appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.