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" ?
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that in determining the arm's length price for transfer pricing adjustments, three companies (MOIAPL, LCAPL, and MOEPAPL) should be excluded from the comparable list as they were functionally not comparable to the assessee, following the binding order of the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Mumbai. However, the ITAT directed the Transfer Pricing Officer/Assessing Officer to include three other companies (ICRA, Cyber, and ITIL) in the list of comparables and calculate the arm's length price accordingly, as they were functionally similar to the assessee, in line with the orders of the coordinate benches of ITAT-Mumbai.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that in determining the arm's length price for transfer pricing adjustments, three companies (MOIAPL, LCAPL, and MOEPAPL) should be excluded from the comparable list as they were functionally not comparable to the assessee, following the binding order of the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Mumbai. However, the ITAT directed the Transfer Pricing Officer/Assessing Officer to include three other companies (ICRA, Cyber, and ITIL) in the list of comparables and calculate the arm's length price accordingly, as they were functionally similar to the assessee, in line with the orders of the coordinate benches of ITAT-Mumbai.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.