Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
India-Mauritius DTAA treaty shipping profits were denied because the assessee's own earlier years had already been decided against it on the same point, and that consistent view was followed. A fixed place permanent establishment was also not proved: the revenue had to show both disposal of the Indian premises and business activity through them, but the survey material showed only limited visits, agent-led operations, and no controlled space or real use by the non-resident. The Indian agent was treated as independent, so no dependent agent permanent establishment arose. As no PE existed, profit attribution to any alleged PE and aggregation of the two entities' income failed. Refund interest was taxed at the treaty rate under the interest article.
India-Mauritius DTAA treaty shipping profits were denied because the assessee's own earlier years had already been decided against it on the same point, and that consistent view was followed. A fixed place permanent establishment was also not proved: the revenue had to show both disposal of the Indian premises and business activity through them, but the survey material showed only limited visits, agent-led operations, and no controlled space or real use by the non-resident. The Indian agent was treated as independent, so no dependent agent permanent establishment arose. As no PE existed, profit attribution to any alleged PE and aggregation of the two entities' income failed. Refund interest was taxed at the treaty rate under the interest article.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
