Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
ITAT followed its earlier orders in the assessee's own case and applied the same transfer pricing treatment for the year under appeal. For the ITES segment, it treated the benchmarking issue as covered by precedent and allowed the assessee's challenge to the arm's length price adjustment. For receivables from associated enterprises, it directed that delayed amounts beyond 90 days be benchmarked using 3 months' average Euribor plus 200 basis points, rather than sustaining the adjustment. For imported fixed assets, it held that a nil value could not be adopted and accepted the customs-determined value as the fair value, setting aside the transfer pricing adjustment.
ITAT followed its earlier orders in the assessee's own case and applied the same transfer pricing treatment for the year under appeal. For the ITES segment, it treated the benchmarking issue as covered by precedent and allowed the assessee's challenge to the arm's length price adjustment. For receivables from associated enterprises, it directed that delayed amounts beyond 90 days be benchmarked using 3 months' average Euribor plus 200 basis points, rather than sustaining the adjustment. For imported fixed assets, it held that a nil value could not be adopted and accepted the customs-determined value as the fair value, setting aside the transfer pricing adjustment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.