Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
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.