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...
In transfer pricing benchmarking for SWD and captive ITeS services, comparables were excluded where functional dissimilarity, significant intangibles and brand value, unreliable segmental data, RPT failures, extraordinary events, abnormal margins and high turnover undermined comparability; high receivables alone was not treated as enough to reject an otherwise functionally similar company. Akshay Software Technologies was remanded for fresh FAR verification because service descriptions alone cannot justify exclusion, while negative working capital adjustment was held impermissible for a captive cost-plus service provider not bearing such risk. The specific claims for Sasken Communication Technologies and Informed Technologies India were also restored for fresh examination, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
In transfer pricing benchmarking for SWD and captive ITeS services, comparables were excluded where functional dissimilarity, significant intangibles and brand value, unreliable segmental data, RPT failures, extraordinary events, abnormal margins and high turnover undermined comparability; high receivables alone was not treated as enough to reject an otherwise functionally similar company. Akshay Software Technologies was remanded for fresh FAR verification because service descriptions alone cannot justify exclusion, while negative working capital adjustment was held impermissible for a captive cost-plus service provider not bearing such risk. The specific claims for Sasken Communication Technologies and Informed Technologies India were also restored for fresh examination, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
