Transfer pricing comparables and adjustments: Tribunal revisits loss-maker status, segmental comparability, working capital relief, and risk allocatio...
Business expenditure disallowance failed where commission, related-party salary and promotion payments were supported by records and inquiry was inade...
CESTAT ALLAHABAD held that refund claim of Special Additional Duty (SAD) was justified as unjust enrichment was not established. The importer provided invoices, VAT Challan, and CA Certificate to support the claim. Original and Appellate Authorities both found no fault in the claim. The principle of not challenging factual findings unless proven perverse was emphasized. Citing a Supreme Court case, the appeal by the revenue was dismissed.
CESTAT ALLAHABAD held that refund claim of Special Additional Duty (SAD) was justified as unjust enrichment was not established. The importer provided invoices, VAT Challan, and CA Certificate to support the claim. Original and Appellate Authorities both found no fault in the claim. The principle of not challenging factual findings unless proven perverse was emphasized. Citing a Supreme Court case, the appeal by the revenue was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
