Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2701 to 2720 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Transfer-pricing benchmarking of subcontract payments under a...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh benchmarking.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Transfer-pricing benchmarking of subcontract payments under a highway operation, maintenance and transfer contract must use the Transactional Net Margin Method where Common Schedule of Rates cannot be reliably correlated with the work allocated under related-party and third-party subcontracts. The schedule rates, including basic and premium components, were not shown to permit verification as an internal comparable; the proposed other method was therefore not accepted. Comparables selected on a build, maintain and transfer profile were functionally unsuitable because the contract covered operation and maintenance of an existing highway with ancillary facilities. Fresh benchmarking was directed using functionally comparable operation, maintenance and transfer entities after giving the assessee an opportunity to respond.
Transfer-pricing benchmarking of subcontract payments under a highway operation, maintenance and transfer contract must use the Transactional Net Margin Method where Common Schedule of Rates cannot be reliably correlated with the work allocated under related-party and third-party subcontracts. The schedule rates, including basic and premium components, were not shown to permit verification as an internal comparable; the proposed other method was therefore not accepted. Comparables selected on a build, maintain and transfer profile were functionally unsuitable because the contract covered operation and maintenance of an existing highway with ancillary facilities. Fresh benchmarking was directed using functionally comparable operation, maintenance and transfer entities after giving the assessee an opportunity to respond.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
