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...
Principles of unjust enrichment - Refund amount ordered to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund instead of being paid to the appellant - The Tribunal interprets Clause (e) of the third proviso to section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and concludes that the appellant had indeed borne the burden of the duty and had not passed it on to any other party. - Based on the findings, the Tribunal determines that the appellant is entitled to the refund amount along with interest, which should be reimbursed directly to the appellant instead of being credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund.
Principles of unjust enrichment - Refund amount ordered to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund instead of being paid to the appellant - The Tribunal interprets Clause (e) of the third proviso to section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and concludes that the appellant had indeed borne the burden of the duty and had not passed it on to any other party. - Based on the findings, the Tribunal determines that the appellant is entitled to the refund amount along with interest, which should be reimbursed directly to the appellant instead of being credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
