Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
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.