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...
The court held that the Original Authority and Revisional Authority misconstrued the scheme and objectives of the Baggage Rules. The petitioner, a foreign national, brought a gold chain and kara by wearing them while arriving from Bangkok, which was not in a concealed manner. The case was found to be squarely covered by the judgments in Pushpa Lekhumal Tulani and Vigneswaran Sethuraman vs. Union of India. Import of gold in India is highly regulated, and bulk importation can only be effected by nominated entities as per regulations. However, Rule 3(1)(h) of the Foreign Trade (Exemption from Application of Rules in Certain Cases) Rules, 1993 provides exemption for import of goods as passenger baggage to the extent permissible under the Baggage Rules.
The court held that the Original Authority and Revisional Authority misconstrued the scheme and objectives of the Baggage Rules. The petitioner, a foreign national, brought a gold chain and kara by wearing them while arriving from Bangkok, which was not in a concealed manner. The case was found to be squarely covered by the judgments in Pushpa Lekhumal Tulani and Vigneswaran Sethuraman vs. Union of India. Import of gold in India is highly regulated, and bulk importation can only be effected by nominated entities as per regulations. However, Rule 3(1)(h) of the Foreign Trade (Exemption from Application of Rules in Certain Cases) Rules, 1993 provides exemption for import of goods as passenger baggage to the extent permissible under the Baggage Rules.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
