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...
Refund including cash refund of DEPB/FPS scrips - principles of unjust enrichment - The Tribunal examined the facts surrounding the refund claims and acknowledged the respondent's reliance on the London Metal Exchange (LME) for pricing. They found that the price of the final products was determined based on LME prices, which were beyond the control of the respondent. - The CESTAT concluded that the principle of unjust enrichment did not apply in this case. They emphasized that the final product prices were based on LME prices, and there was no evidence of the duty burden being passed on to buyers.
Refund including cash refund of DEPB/FPS scrips - principles of unjust enrichment - The Tribunal examined the facts surrounding the refund claims and acknowledged the respondent's reliance on the London Metal Exchange (LME) for pricing. They found that the price of the final products was determined based on LME prices, which were beyond the control of the respondent. - The CESTAT concluded that the principle of unjust enrichment did not apply in this case. They emphasized that the final product prices were based on LME prices, and there was no evidence of the duty burden being passed on to buyers.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
