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...
Income taxable in India or not - Business of supplying reservoir simulation software and related services. - Receipts from Indian customers - Taxing the entire receipts of the assessee by applying the provisions of section 44BB - The Tribunal agreed with the assessee that the absence of a PE in India was critical and thus Section 44BB of the Act was not applicable. The tribunal found that the impugned receipts could not be taxed as either royalties or FTS under the India-Canada DTAA because they did not meet the necessary criteria. It upheld the beneficial provisions of the DTAA over domestic tax laws, stating that the assessee could choose the more favorable treaty benefits.
Income taxable in India or not - Business of supplying reservoir simulation software and related services. - Receipts from Indian customers - Taxing the entire receipts of the assessee by applying the provisions of section 44BB - The Tribunal agreed with the assessee that the absence of a PE in India was critical and thus Section 44BB of the Act was not applicable. The tribunal found that the impugned receipts could not be taxed as either royalties or FTS under the India-Canada DTAA because they did not meet the necessary criteria. It upheld the beneficial provisions of the DTAA over domestic tax laws, stating that the assessee could choose the more favorable treaty benefits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
