Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
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.