Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
STI, a wholly owned subsidiary of Samsung Korea, was engaged in the manufacture and sale of mobile handsets under the Samsung brand in India and overseas markets. The tax authorities concluded that STI was acting as a contract manufacturer for Samsung Korea and was not remunerated as an independent manufacturer utilizing technical know-how. However, the ITAT held that STI was operating as an independent manufacturer and not a contract manufacturer for the following reasons: STI was engaged in manufacturing and selling goods as per its own volition, not under directives from Samsung Korea. The transfer of technical know-how and licensing of technology from Samsung Korea was necessary for STI to undertake its activities independently. There was no evidence that the transactions between STI and its AEs were motivated by directives from Samsung Korea or lacked commercial prudence. The mere fact of being a subsidiary did not imply that STI was engaged solely at the behest of Samsung Korea.
STI, a wholly owned subsidiary of Samsung Korea, was engaged in the manufacture and sale of mobile handsets under the Samsung brand in India and overseas markets. The tax authorities concluded that STI was acting as a contract manufacturer for Samsung Korea and was not remunerated as an independent manufacturer utilizing technical know-how. However, the ITAT held that STI was operating as an independent manufacturer and not a contract manufacturer for the following reasons: STI was engaged in manufacturing and selling goods as per its own volition, not under directives from Samsung Korea. The transfer of technical know-how and licensing of technology from Samsung Korea was necessary for STI to undertake its activities independently. There was no evidence that the transactions between STI and its AEs were motivated by directives from Samsung Korea or lacked commercial prudence. The mere fact of being a subsidiary did not imply that STI was engaged solely at the behest of Samsung Korea.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.