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...
CESTAT NEW DELHI upheld the clubbing of consignments imported by Banke Bihari and Zippo Mobiles to avoid anti-dumping duty. Banke Bihari imported calculator parts to assemble them, triggering duty liability u/s 28(4) & 28(8) of Customs Act. Undervaluation of DVB remotes and diodes was confirmed, applying rule 12 of Valuation Rules. Differential duty was imposed due to undervaluation. Goods were confiscated u/s 111(m) and penalties imposed u/s 112 & 114A for misclassification and submitting false invoices. Appeals were dismissed, affirming the Principal Commissioner's decisions.
CESTAT NEW DELHI upheld the clubbing of consignments imported by Banke Bihari and Zippo Mobiles to avoid anti-dumping duty. Banke Bihari imported calculator parts to assemble them, triggering duty liability u/s 28(4) & 28(8) of Customs Act. Undervaluation of DVB remotes and diodes was confirmed, applying rule 12 of Valuation Rules. Differential duty was imposed due to undervaluation. Goods were confiscated u/s 111(m) and penalties imposed u/s 112 & 114A for misclassification and submitting false invoices. Appeals were dismissed, affirming the Principal Commissioner's decisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.