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...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Bright Line Test is not a legally sanctioned method for transfer pricing adjustments relating to advertising, marketing and promotion expenses. Following the established position in Sony Ericsson and Maruti Suzuki, the High Court rejected the Department's use of that test for the impugned adjustment. The pendency of challenges to those precedents before the Supreme Court did not justify a different approach, although any contrary law subsequently declared in those proceedings would apply correspondingly.
Bright Line Test is not a legally sanctioned method for transfer pricing adjustments relating to advertising, marketing and promotion expenses. Following the established position in Sony Ericsson and Maruti Suzuki, the High Court rejected the Department's use of that test for the impugned adjustment. The pendency of challenges to those precedents before the Supreme Court did not justify a different approach, although any contrary law subsequently declared in those proceedings would apply correspondingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.