Comparable Uncontrolled Price method is appropriate where reliable internal and external data for identical raw materials show that associated-enterprise prices are no higher than independent-supplier and relevant import prices. Consistent acceptance of that method on unchanged transaction and business facts supports its continued application, while replacing it with the Transactional Net Margin Method would breach consistency. Even under TNMM, a diversified manufacturer and service provider without segmental financial data is not functionally comparable to an entity manufacturing only optical fibre. The assessee's arm's length price determination was upheld and the transfer-pricing adjustment was deleted.

Offshore supply profits from equipment, integrated designs and spares were not taxable in India where manufacture and supply operations occurred abroad, title passed on FOB shipment, consideration was received abroad, and no Indian fixed place or supervisory permanent establishment carried on those supplies. The force of attraction rule did not apply without a relevant permanent establishment. Supervisory activities exceeding the treaty threshold created a supervisory permanent establishment; receipts effectively connected with it were taxable as net business profits rather than fees for technical services, avoiding gross taxation and double taxation. Project-specific designs and drawings supplied without any right to commercially exploit intellectual property constituted sale of copyrighted products, not royalty or technical services.

Section 90(2) permits an assessee to choose, independently for each assessment year, the more beneficial treatment under the Income-tax Act or an applicable tax treaty. Where treaty treatment under Article 13 of the India-Mauritius DTAA is elected, capital gains exempt from tax in India do not enter the domestic computation mechanism for set-off of brought-forward losses under Section 74. Short-term capital losses validly determined and carried forward under the Act in earlier years therefore need not be adjusted against treaty-exempt capital gains and remain available for carry forward to subsequent years.

Delayed remittance of deducted TDS may be compounded where an initially approved application was not paid within time because of bona fide financial constraints, including company liquidation. Deposit of the full compounding amount pursuant to a judicial direction justified extending the payment period until the deposit date and reviving the earlier approval. Rejection of the compounding application was set aside, with the prior compounding approval made effective up to the date of payment, subject to additional costs.

Registration under Section 12A cannot be directed solely on unpleaded and unsubstantiated oral assertions of charitable activity. Claims concerning implementation of a charitable healthcare project require supporting material on record or legally admissible additional evidence, with formal notice to the Revenue. Registration granted for later years does not establish eligibility for earlier relevant years, which must be assessed from the activities actually undertaken and evidence available for those years. The registration issue therefore requires fresh determination on the existing record and any legally admissible additional evidence.

Section 153A's extended ten-year period for search-related reassessment is computed from the end of the assessment year relevant to the search year, unlike the six-year period under section 153A(1)(b), which covers years immediately preceding that assessment year. The search assessment year is therefore included as the first year of the ten-year block. For a search conducted in financial year 2023-24, Assessment Year 2024-25 was the first year and Assessment Year 2015-16 the tenth year. Assessment Year 2014-15 fell outside the permissible period, rendering the reassessment notice time-barred and liable to be quashed.

Conditional condonation of delay may be justified where alleged non-service of the assessment order, a prima facie challenge to reassessment jurisdiction, and disputed computation of tax on total turnover rather than taxable income require merits examination. A 570-day delay in filing an appeal before the CIT(A) was condoned subject to costs, and the appeal was restored for an independent decision on all available grounds without rejection on limitation.

Refund implementation was addressed where repeated applications remained unanswered and the refund was not granted for an inordinate period. The taxpayer was permitted to submit a computation of the balance interest to the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer was required to examine that computation and pay any interest found due within the stipulated period.

Transfer-pricing comparables may be excluded where the proposed company's functions, products or end-use materially differ from those of the tested party, particularly where reliable segmental data is unavailable. Bilcare Ltd. was unsuitable because its diverse pharmaceutical packaging and service activities differed from paper-based aseptic food-and-beverage packaging, and current-year segmental data was absent. Karur KCP Packaging Ltd. was also unsuitable because its kraft paper and polypropylene bags served the cement industry and differed in products and end-use. These fact-specific exclusions do not raise a substantial question of law absent perversity.

Transactional net margin method aggregation is examined in relation to closely linked domestic and international transactions for arm's length price determination. The issues include whether entity-level aggregation is permissible where domestic manufacturing results downstream from imports from associated enterprises, and whether the Tribunal's order is affected by perversity. The High Court admitted the appeal on the specified substantial questions of law and listed it for hearing.

A complainant whose information led to reassessment proceedings has no locus standi to be impleaded in writ petitions challenging those proceedings. The Assessing Officer's action is the subject of challenge, and the Assessing Officer alone must defend it; the complainant has no independent right to participate in the writ proceedings. The impleadment application was rejected. The writ petitions were listed for further hearing, while status quo on recovery and penalty proceedings was maintained until replies were filed.

Delay in filing a corrected return to add the prefix "M/s." to an assessee-firm's name may be condoned under Section 119(2)(b) where the original return was timely and the correction is purely clerical. No change to the PAN, the firm's constitution, returned income, tax liability, or substantive claims arises from such correction, and no prejudice is caused to the Revenue. The condonation power should advance substantial justice where genuine hardship would otherwise result and should not be denied on a hyper-technical procedural ground. The corrected return should be treated as validly filed and processed according to law.

Revision under Section 264 remains maintainable after the limitation period for the available appellate remedy has expired, provided no appeal or delay-condonation application is pending. Section 264(4) bars revisional jurisdiction only where an appeal lies and remains capable of being filed within the subsisting appeal period, or where a required waiver of appeal has not been given. The revisional authority cannot decline jurisdiction solely because an appellate remedy was originally available. Any merits observations made while incorrectly treating the revision as non-maintainable should not influence fresh consideration on merits.

Look Out Circulars issued to protect India's economic interests may be judicially reviewed for legality, relevance of material and manifest arbitrariness, but courts cannot substitute their assessment for the competent authority's subjective satisfaction or reassess the qualitative or quantitative sufficiency of supporting inputs. Greater restraint applies in fiscal and economic matters unless the material is nonexistent, wholly speculative or manifestly untenable. Allegations concerning trade-based money laundering, hawala-linked transactions, over-invoiced exports, fraudulent export incentives, bogus purchases, fake invoices and fraudulent input tax credit constituted relevant and substantial material. The Look Out Circular therefore remained sustainable, and the order invalidating it was set aside.

Residential waste-management activities comprising cleaning common areas and collecting, segregating and storing garbage are classifiable under SAC 999423 as general waste collection services from residential locations, rather than under a residuary service category. Exemption under Serial No. 3A of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) requires a composite supply of goods and services. Bins, cleaning tools, consumables and welfare equipment used by the supplier at its own cost, without transfer of ownership or possession to the recipient, are not goods supplied to the recipient. The arrangement therefore remains a taxable service and does not qualify for the exemption.

Burial-ground upkeep involving sweeping, cleaning and garbage collection is classified under SAC 999424 as general waste collection services, rather than a residuary service category. GST exemption under Serial No. 3A of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) requires a composite supply of goods and services. Cleaning bins, tools, consumables and welfare items used by the supplier solely to perform the service do not constitute a supply of goods where their ownership or possession is not transferred to the recipient. The activity therefore remains a service supply and does not qualify for the claimed exemption.

Revocation of GST registration cancellation requires an effective opportunity to address material relied upon by the proper officer. Although Section 29 permits cancellation and Section 30 permits a registered taxpayer to seek revocation, a field visit report not supplied with the original show-cause notice must be furnished before rejecting revocation for failure to respond to a subsequent notice. The revocation application requires reconsideration after disclosure of the field visit report and, if necessary, a further inspection.

Section 93(1)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 requires assessment proceedings involving a deceased sole proprietor to be pursued against the legal representative under the prescribed statutory procedure. Death before issuance of the assessment order makes assessment-related and appellate orders against the deceased proprietor unsustainable where the authorities fail to address that requirement. Participation by the legal representative in hearings and statutory appeals does not remove the need to proceed in accordance with Section 93(1)(b). The appellate order was set aside, with fresh consideration required after affording the legal representative a hearing.

Best-judgment assessment for non-furnishing of a return is deemed withdrawn under section 62(2) when the registered person subsequently furnishes a valid return within the prescribed period. Interest and late-fee liability nevertheless continues. Where the relevant return was filed after assessment with applicable late fee, additional late fee and interest, and that filing was undisputed, the assessment order stood deemed withdrawn and was set aside.

Assessment proceedings cannot validly continue against a deceased proprietor. An assessment issued after death is non est because it is directed at a person incapable of being proceeded against, and the required opportunity of personal hearing is not met. Although Section 93 permits recovery of tax dues from the deceased person's business or estate, fresh assessment proceedings must be initiated against the appropriate legal representative or person carrying on the business after notice and hearing. Any recovery remains limited to the deceased proprietor's estate, and a consequential rejection of the statutory appeal is invalid.