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...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Penalty for short-payment of additional sales tax was held not to be attracted where the dispute concerned only the applicable rate and there was no suppression or variation in turnover. Because the turnover returned and the turnover assessed were identical, the case did not amount to an incorrect or incomplete return within the meaning of the penalty provision. The Court also applied strict construction to penalty statutes and held that Section 12(3)(b) did not authorise penalty merely because tax was paid at a lower percentage. The appellate authority's deletion of penalty, affirmed by the Tribunal, was upheld and the State's revision was dismissed.
Penalty for short-payment of additional sales tax was held not to be attracted where the dispute concerned only the applicable rate and there was no suppression or variation in turnover. Because the turnover returned and the turnover assessed were identical, the case did not amount to an incorrect or incomplete return within the meaning of the penalty provision. The Court also applied strict construction to penalty statutes and held that Section 12(3)(b) did not authorise penalty merely because tax was paid at a lower percentage. The appellate authority's deletion of penalty, affirmed by the Tribunal, was upheld and the State's revision was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.