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...
A writ petition challenging a GST appellate order was not entertained because an effective statutory appeal before the now-functioning GST Appellate Tribunal was available. The Court held that writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be used where a specialised remedy exists, especially when the petitioner's objections concerned GST issues suited to the Tribunal's examination. No exception applied: there was no challenge to the statute's vires, no lack of jurisdiction, and no violation of natural justice because the petitioner had participated and filed a reply. The petitioner was relegated to the appellate remedy, with interim protection continued until the Tribunal decides the stay application.
A writ petition challenging a GST appellate order was not entertained because an effective statutory appeal before the now-functioning GST Appellate Tribunal was available. The Court held that writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be used where a specialised remedy exists, especially when the petitioner's objections concerned GST issues suited to the Tribunal's examination. No exception applied: there was no challenge to the statute's vires, no lack of jurisdiction, and no violation of natural justice because the petitioner had participated and filed a reply. The petitioner was relegated to the appellate remedy, with interim protection continued until the Tribunal decides the stay application.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.