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 High Court upheld the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) which had approved the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method adopted by the assessee for transfer pricing adjustment for the assessment year 2018-19. The Court noted that the ITAT had consistently held the CUP method as the most appropriate method for the same assessee in earlier years, and the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) erred in adopting a new method, i.e., the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM), treating it as the most appropriate method for the year under consideration. The High Court concurred with the ITAT's order and dismissed the revenue's appeal, holding that no substantial question of law arose.
The High Court upheld the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) which had approved the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method adopted by the assessee for transfer pricing adjustment for the assessment year 2018-19. The Court noted that the ITAT had consistently held the CUP method as the most appropriate method for the same assessee in earlier years, and the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) erred in adopting a new method, i.e., the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM), treating it as the most appropriate method for the year under consideration. The High Court concurred with the ITAT's order and dismissed the revenue's appeal, holding that no substantial question of law arose.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
