Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
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.