The court held that transfer pricing adjustments cannot automatically be treated as misreporting of income. Without evidence of deliberate concealment, penalty under Section 270A cannot be imposed.
FSSAI has revised turnover thresholds for food business registration and licensing under the 2026 amendment regulations. The new limits aim to streamline regulatory compliance and reduce burdens on smaller food businesses.
The article examines how Section 64 of the CGST Act is increasingly used against genuine recipients in ITC disputes. It argues that summary assessment powers meant for emergencies are being misapplied to fast-track tax demands.
Courts have repeatedly held that bona fide buyers cannot lose ITC merely because suppliers default or registrations are cancelled retrospectively.
Through Notification No. 25/2026-Customs (N.T.), CBIC updated tariff values for edible oils, gold, silver, and brass scrap to reflect current price trends and ensure accurate customs duty assessment.
The Budget 2026 amendment to the intermediary provision raises questions about the validity of ongoing GST disputes. Without a saving clause, taxpayers may argue that pending proceedings lack statutory support.
IFSCA clarified that the supersession of earlier fee circulars will apply from the date of commencement rather than the date of issuance, ensuring clarity in regulatory implementation.
SEBI clarified conditions under which mutual funds can use intraday borrowings to address redemption payout timing mismatches. The borrowing amount must be linked to guaranteed receivables due the same day.
A show cause notice was issued proposing reclassification, recovery of differential duty under section 28(4) of the Customs Act, and imposition of penalties. Additional Director General confirmed the demand, ordered recovery of duty with interest, and imposed penalties including a penalty on Manager of the appellant company. Aggrieved, appellant filed the present appeals.
The Tribunal ruled that an assessment order passed after DRP directions is still subject to revision under Section 263. It held that there is no statutory bar preventing the Principal Commissioner from revising such orders.
