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 electronic GST penalty order was upheld despite not separately displaying a DIN because it carried a portal-verifiable RFN and had been served through statutory modes recognised under section 169, including the common portal, registered post and e-mail. The Court held that a challenge based only on the absence of the DIN label could not succeed where the communication was traceable and authentic, and relied on the CBIC circular dated 09.06.2025 clarifying that portal-generated communications with a verifiable RFN do not require a separate DIN. The writ petition was dismissed, with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal and exclusion of writ time for limitation purposes.
An electronic GST penalty order was upheld despite not separately displaying a DIN because it carried a portal-verifiable RFN and had been served through statutory modes recognised under section 169, including the common portal, registered post and e-mail. The Court held that a challenge based only on the absence of the DIN label could not succeed where the communication was traceable and authentic, and relied on the CBIC circular dated 09.06.2025 clarifying that portal-generated communications with a verifiable RFN do not require a separate DIN. The writ petition was dismissed, with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal and exclusion of writ time for limitation purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.