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...
State tax dues in liquidation do not rank as secured debt unless a valid security interest exists under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Applying the waterfall mechanism in Section 53, the Tribunal held that the Excise and Taxation Department could not be treated at par with secured financial creditors, and that the Haryana Value Added Tax Act could not override the Code by virtue of Section 238. The liquidator's withholding of sale proceeds and insistence on an indemnity for a possible future change in law were held unsustainable. The withheld proceeds were directed to be distributed to the secured financial creditor that had relinquished its security interest.
State tax dues in liquidation do not rank as secured debt unless a valid security interest exists under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Applying the waterfall mechanism in Section 53, the Tribunal held that the Excise and Taxation Department could not be treated at par with secured financial creditors, and that the Haryana Value Added Tax Act could not override the Code by virtue of Section 238. The liquidator's withholding of sale proceeds and insistence on an indemnity for a possible future change in law were held unsustainable. The withheld proceeds were directed to be distributed to the secured financial creditor that had relinquished its security interest.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
