Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Safe Harbour Rules could not be applied suo motu to rework segmental trading costs where the assessee had not opted for that regime and had furnished segmental accounts with allocation keys; the Assessing Officer/Transfer Pricing Officer was directed to adopt the assessee's allocation after verification. An arm's length price of nil for intra-group services was also rejected because the Other Method requires a comparable uncontrolled transaction, which was not shown, and the services had already been aggregated and benchmarked under TNMM, making a separate adjustment a double count. The same reasoning invalidated the lumpsum licence fee adjustment and separate benchmarking of trademark fee. The penalty challenge was dismissed as premature.
Safe Harbour Rules could not be applied suo motu to rework segmental trading costs where the assessee had not opted for that regime and had furnished segmental accounts with allocation keys; the Assessing Officer/Transfer Pricing Officer was directed to adopt the assessee's allocation after verification. An arm's length price of nil for intra-group services was also rejected because the Other Method requires a comparable uncontrolled transaction, which was not shown, and the services had already been aggregated and benchmarked under TNMM, making a separate adjustment a double count. The same reasoning invalidated the lumpsum licence fee adjustment and separate benchmarking of trademark fee. The penalty challenge was dismissed as premature.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
