Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
401 to 420 of 95875 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
In transfer pricing under TNMM, the ITAT treated regular foreign exchange gain as operating income, held that common Delhi and Dehradun expenses had to be allocated on gross profit margins rather than turnover, and applied broad functional comparability to accept the five comparables; it also rejected exclusion of Gontermann Pieper as a persistent loss-maker because it had not suffered losses for three consecutive years. The transfer pricing adjustment was therefore restored to the TPO/AO for recomputation on those terms. On interest deduction, the ITAT applied CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody and allowed interest expenditure against interest income, holding that absence of dividend from the subsidiary investment did not justify disallowance. The interest disallowance was deleted.
In transfer pricing under TNMM, the ITAT treated regular foreign exchange gain as operating income, held that common Delhi and Dehradun expenses had to be allocated on gross profit margins rather than turnover, and applied broad functional comparability to accept the five comparables; it also rejected exclusion of Gontermann Pieper as a persistent loss-maker because it had not suffered losses for three consecutive years. The transfer pricing adjustment was therefore restored to the TPO/AO for recomputation on those terms. On interest deduction, the ITAT applied CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody and allowed interest expenditure against interest income, holding that absence of dividend from the subsidiary investment did not justify disallowance. The interest disallowance was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
