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...
Valuation of export goods - export of Iron Ore Fines - the transaction value i.e. FOB price cannot be treated as cum duty price under section 14 of Customs Act, 1962 for the purpose of calculation of export duty. - The appellant cannot, on their own, claim a new valuation methodology for their exports when the law specifically lays down that transaction value at the place of export is the assessable value for determining the export duty. - AT
Valuation of export goods - export of Iron Ore Fines - the transaction value i.e. FOB price cannot be treated as cum duty price under section 14 of Customs Act, 1962 for the purpose of calculation of export duty. - The appellant cannot, on their own, claim a new valuation methodology for their exports when the law specifically lays down that transaction value at the place of export is the assessable value for determining the export duty. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.