Head Office cost allocation requires prescribed transfer-pricing methods; treaty ceilings bar surcharge and cess, while duplicate taxation is excluded...
Cost-to-cost reimbursement of seconded employees is not service consideration; transfer-pricing markup was deleted and amalgamation amortisation allow...
Crystallisation of liability supports prior-period expense deduction, while functionally distinct divisions require separate transfer-pricing benchmar...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires transaction-specific FAR analysis before benchmarking business-support services provided to associated en...
Advance pricing agreement methodology can guide benchmarking for non-covered years when functions, assets, risks and activities remain materially unch...
Page of 4918
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 98359 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Valuation of imported goods - stamping foils - rejection of declared value - The tribunal found that the department's reliance on proforma invoices for A-grade goods was misplaced, given the appellant's importation of B and C-grade goods. The tribunal also recognized the appellant's submission of contemporaneous import data supporting their declared values. - The tribunal concurred with the appellant that there was no evidence of extra payment to the foreign supplier beyond the invoice values. - Tribunal held that the appellant's declared values were justified, and the initial inculpatory statement could not be relied upon due to the coercive circumstances under which it was obtained.
Valuation of imported goods - stamping foils - rejection of declared value - The tribunal found that the department's reliance on proforma invoices for A-grade goods was misplaced, given the appellant's importation of B and C-grade goods. The tribunal also recognized the appellant's submission of contemporaneous import data supporting their declared values. - The tribunal concurred with the appellant that there was no evidence of extra payment to the foreign supplier beyond the invoice values. - Tribunal held that the appellant's declared values were justified, and the initial inculpatory statement could not be relied upon due to the coercive circumstances under which it was obtained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4918 
