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...
Classification of e-commerce fulfilment activity turned on commercial substance, not contractual labels. The Appellate Authority found that hub-based collection, sorting, transshipment, tracking and last-mile doorstep delivery had the characteristics of organised courier and logistics operations, so the activity was not a genuine goods transport agency service despite a consignment note and separate recovery of transport charges. It also held that no independent transportation contract existed between the platform customer and the service provider, so the customer could not be treated as the recipient of GTA service. Exemption for GTA service to unregistered recipients was therefore unavailable, and the supply was liable to GST as a taxable courier/logistics/fulfilment service.
Classification of e-commerce fulfilment activity turned on commercial substance, not contractual labels. The Appellate Authority found that hub-based collection, sorting, transshipment, tracking and last-mile doorstep delivery had the characteristics of organised courier and logistics operations, so the activity was not a genuine goods transport agency service despite a consignment note and separate recovery of transport charges. It also held that no independent transportation contract existed between the platform customer and the service provider, so the customer could not be treated as the recipient of GTA service. Exemption for GTA service to unregistered recipients was therefore unavailable, and the supply was liable to GST as a taxable courier/logistics/fulfilment service.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
