Statutory appellate remedy against cancellation of GST registration was restored after dismissal on limitation. Applying the terms of an earlier High Court decision, the writ petition was disposed of without adjudicating the merits of the cancellation proceedings. The appeal must be decided on merits and cannot be rejected on limitation, thereby reinstating access to the prescribed appellate process.

Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority and, as regulatory fees, a reasonable correlation with services rendered. The development authority could exercise Municipal Commissioner powers only upon State notification, while its governing statute did not independently authorise scrutiny fee, ground rent or security deposit; those demands were quashed, subject to the pending writ appeal. Labour welfare cess remained payable, but requiring payment upfront before construction contravened the prescribed collection mechanism for construction extending beyond one year; a fresh demand had to follow Rule 4. Building-plan sanction involved neither a supply of goods nor services, so CGST and SGST on sanction charges were also quashed.

Polypropylene or polyethylene plastic twine (sutli) manufactured through extrusion, slitting, orientation and twisting is classified as an article of plastics under sub-heading 39269099. The manufacturing process does not make it a textile material for Heading 5607, and the product is not a container or packing article within Heading 3923. In the absence of a more specific Chapter 39 classification, residuary Heading 3926 applies. Plastic twine under Heading 3926 attracts GST at 18 per cent, comprising 9 per cent CGST and 9 per cent SGST.

Pure-agent exclusion under Rule 33 requires satisfaction of every prescribed condition, including contractual authority to procure third-party services on the end customer's behalf. Hotel booking charges could not be excluded where the third-party booking agent invoiced the facilitator, indicating that it received and used the service in supplying its own hotel booking service, and where the recovered amount included a service charge not known to or authorised by the customer. The booking service is classified under SAC 998552 as reservation services for accommodation, cruises and package tours. CGST and SGST apply at 9% each on the entire consideration received from end customers.

Bright Line Test is not a legally sanctioned method for transfer pricing adjustments relating to advertising, marketing and promotion expenses. Following the established position in Sony Ericsson and Maruti Suzuki, the High Court rejected the Department's use of that test for the impugned adjustment. The pendency of challenges to those precedents before the Supreme Court did not justify a different approach, although any contrary law subsequently declared in those proceedings would apply correspondingly.

Article 289(1) immunises the property and income of a State from Union taxation, overriding an inconsistent charge under the Income-tax Act. A State-controlled conservation society, governed and staffed by State functionaries, financially and functionally dependent on the State, and discharging environmental conservation obligations linked to Article 48A, falls within State instrumentality principles. Statutory, ring-fenced conservation funds and incidental interest constitute public funds held in trust rather than ordinary commercial receipts. Such income cannot be charged to tax, and tax-recovery action lacks jurisdiction. Bank-account attachment for recovery under the Income-tax Act was therefore unsustainable and quashed.

Gujarat GST registration applications require biometric authentication, photographs and prescribed KYC or document verification, subject to applicable exemptions. Cancellation and suspension mechanisms extend to wrongful input tax credit, return mismatches, excess outward-supply reporting and electronic credit ledger breaches. Significant discrepancies may trigger electronic suspension intimation and a notice seeking explanation, with refunds barred during suspension. The amendments also restrict unmatched input tax credit, block outward-supply reporting for specified return defaulters, limit electronic credit ledger use in prescribed cases, and expand e-way bill validity and restrictions.

Reassessment following a completed scrutiny assessment was initiated on alleged inflation of Special Economic Zone export profits through non-payment of interest on partners' capital and below-market gold purchases from a sister concern. Relevant transaction particulars had been available during the original assessment, while the amended partnership deed-specifically brought to the Assessing Officer's attention-had rendered the interest-payment clause inoperative. The reopening nevertheless relied on the original deed. Objections concerning the rate and fineness of gold were also not addressed. The reassessment notice and the order rejecting objections were quashed, and the writ petition succeeded.

Interest expenditure may be deducted against dividend income only to the extent that borrowed funds have a direct nexus with investments generating that income; the extent of such nexus is a factual determination and the balance interest cannot be deducted without supporting evidence. No notional interest is taxable on refundable security deposits for employee residential premises where the deposits serve business purposes and generate no actual income. The High Court also rejected the Revenue's challenges concerning deduction for a new industrial undertaking in existing factory premises and interest and trial-run overheads relating to new machinery, following prior decisions. Questions on closing-stock valuation, including excise-duty treatment, were answered under an earlier High Court ruling.

Depreciation on goodwill arising from amalgamation remained allowable because the claim had consistently been accepted in the taxpayer's earlier assessment years and no material factual change was shown. The Revenue's reliance on a decision involving artificial and colourable creation of goodwill was distinguishable, with no comparable finding here. Deduction of employee stock option reimbursement expenditure was also sustained, as an earlier Tribunal ruling in the taxpayer's own matter had addressed objections on business purpose, capital character and tax deduction at source, and no distinguishing facts were produced. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

Delay and laches, acquiescence, estoppel, and the clean hands doctrine arise in oppression and mismanagement proceedings, alongside the Tribunal's jurisdiction to examine allegations of fraud and forgery. The issues also include the standard of preponderance of probabilities, perversity of findings in an appeal under Section 10F, admission of additional appellate evidence under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC, and appointment of a special auditor. The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the High Court's decision and dismissed the special leave petition.

Reassessment jurisdiction was sustained because reasons to believe were recorded and the prescribed statutory procedure was followed. However, additions for alleged unexplained income and expenditure drawn from seized ledger entries could not be made again in another assessee's hands where the ledger owner had accepted the entire recorded amounts and those amounts had already been substantively assessed and confirmed in that person's hands. Corresponding protective additions in the company's hands also could not survive after the substantive additions in the individual's hands were deleted on merits. The challenges to reassessment failed, while the duplicate substantive and related protective additions were deleted.

Anonymous donations received by a trust registered under section 12A and claiming exemption under section 11 are specifically governed by section 115BBC. As section 115BBC does not require records establishing anonymous donors' identity, name or address, absence of those particulars cannot justify treating such donations as unexplained cash credits under section 68. The donations are taxable at the prescribed rate under section 115BBC rather than being added as unexplained cash credits.

Transfer-pricing treatment of advertisement, marketing and promotion expenditure requires evidence of an arrangement obligating expenditure for an associated enterprise's brand promotion; disclosed marketing reimbursements alone do not create a separate international transaction. Accordingly, AMP adjustments based on the Bright Line Test or intensity-based TNMM were deleted. Comparable selection must reflect functional similarity, with service providers excluded from a predominantly trading-based networking segment and manufacturing comparables adjusted or verified where required. Royalty integral to manufacturing may be aggregated under TNMM where reliable CUP comparables are unavailable, avoiding double adjustment. For low-risk equipment .....

Profit attribution to an Indian dependent agency permanent establishment (DAPE) may extend beyond arm's length remuneration where the transfer-pricing analysis fails to capture all functions performed and risks assumed. A Mutual Agreement Procedure resolution binds only the assessment years expressly covered, though its methodology may be applied to other years if facts and functions remain unchanged. Where the DAPE undertakes additional activities beyond those disclosed in the transfer-pricing study, a separate attribution is warranted; profit was restricted to 12% of advertisement revenue rather than the estimated rate. Tax credit for taxes paid by the DAPE requires verification and quantification. Interest is consequential, while a challenge to penalty initiation at assessment stage is premature.

Revision under section 263 cannot rest merely on a view that the Assessing Officer should have conducted a deeper inquiry into share capital received from an existing non-resident shareholder. Where the assessment record shows detailed queries and supporting material on the investor's identity, creditworthiness, remittance and transaction, an assessment order need not expressly record every inquiry to establish application of mind. Revisionary jurisdiction does not permit re-examination where the Assessing Officer adopted a permissible view after inquiry. The revisionary authority must undertake at least minimal independent inquiry and clearly establish that the assessment is both erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue; it cannot remand genuineness for fresh determination.

Reassessment jurisdiction cannot rest on unverified, factually incorrect information or disregard the taxpayer's specific explanation. Aggregating distinct information-portal entries as escaped income, when only one entry was relevant, showed non-application of mind; the eventual addition also did not match the aggregated amount or one entry. Reopening on that premise was invalid because the Assessing Officer failed to verify the information before assuming jurisdiction and did not address the objection. The reassessment order was quashed and the appeal allowed.

Related-party advances by a charitable society did not warrant denial of exemption where the construction advance arose in ordinary construction activity and no evidence showed personal benefit to specified persons, overpricing, or non-arm's-length terms. Advances to registered charitable institutions were not shown to divert funds for private benefit. Section 40A(2)(a) could not apply because the disputed interest was paid to unrelated banks, making the related disallowance and notional-interest addition unsustainable. Donations to registered charitable entities undertaking charitable activities were permissible application of income, and scholarships were claimed as charitable application. The disallowances were deleted and exemption under sections 11 and 12 was extended.

Statutory sanction by the authority specified under section 151(ii) is a jurisdictional precondition for reassessment notices issued beyond three years where alleged escaped income exceeds the prescribed threshold. For AY 2016-17, approval from the Principal Commissioner did not satisfy the requirement for approval from the Principal Chief Commissioner. The defect invalidated the assumption of reassessment jurisdiction, resulting in the reassessment order being quashed.

Penalty for failure to obtain a tax audit applies where existing books of account are not audited; it does not apply merely because books were not maintained or produced. Failure to maintain books and failure to obtain an audit are distinct defaults with separate consequences. Where turnover and profit are estimated from bank deposits because no books are available, estimated turnover or bank statements cannot substitute for books of account capable of audit. On these facts, the penalty for non-audit was unsustainable and was deleted.