Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
This summary discusses various transfer pricing and tax issues. It analyzes whether Advertisement, Marketing and Promotion (AMP) expenses incurred by the assessee were for the sole benefit of its associated enterprise, thus constituting an international transaction u/s 92B. The Tribunal held that separate AMP adjustment is not required when the distribution business is already benchmarked. Regarding benchmarking of reimbursement of marketing expenses, the Tribunal directed a 20% markup adjustment to resolve the long-pending issue. It also covers the deselection of certain companies for benchmarking the software division's arm's length price, depreciation on the Dharuhera unit, dividend distribution tax u/s 115-O, and depreciation on software license fees. The Tribunal remitted the software license fee issue to the Assessing Officer for verification and recomputation as per the Income Tax Rules.
This summary discusses various transfer pricing and tax issues. It analyzes whether Advertisement, Marketing and Promotion (AMP) expenses incurred by the assessee were for the sole benefit of its associated enterprise, thus constituting an international transaction u/s 92B. The Tribunal held that separate AMP adjustment is not required when the distribution business is already benchmarked. Regarding benchmarking of reimbursement of marketing expenses, the Tribunal directed a 20% markup adjustment to resolve the long-pending issue. It also covers the deselection of certain companies for benchmarking the software division's arm's length price, depreciation on the Dharuhera unit, dividend distribution tax u/s 115-O, and depreciation on software license fees. The Tribunal remitted the software license fee issue to the Assessing Officer for verification and recomputation as per the Income Tax Rules.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
