Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
821 to 840 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Tribunal held that the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO)/Assessing Officer (AO) should exclude companies having turnover exceeding Rs. 200 crores from the comparability analysis while calculating the arm's length price (ALP) of the assessee's international transactions with its associated enterprise, after necessary verification. The companies ICRA Techno Analytics Ltd and Kals Information Systems Ltd. were found functionally different from the assessee engaged in software development services and hence cannot be included as comparables. However, Quintegra Solution Limited, being functionally similar and having similar turnover, cannot be excluded merely for showing losses due to extraordinary deductions. The AO/TPO was directed to include it as a comparable. Regarding working capital adjustment, the Tribunal remanded the matter to the AO/TPO for fresh adjudication as per law, allowing the assessee to furnish necessary details. The royalty expenses were held as revenue in nature based on earlier years' decisions. The AO was directed to correctly compute interest u/ss 234D and 244A as per provisions of law.
The Tribunal held that the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO)/Assessing Officer (AO) should exclude companies having turnover exceeding Rs. 200 crores from the comparability analysis while calculating the arm's length price (ALP) of the assessee's international transactions with its associated enterprise, after necessary verification. The companies ICRA Techno Analytics Ltd and Kals Information Systems Ltd. were found functionally different from the assessee engaged in software development services and hence cannot be included as comparables. However, Quintegra Solution Limited, being functionally similar and having similar turnover, cannot be excluded merely for showing losses due to extraordinary deductions. The AO/TPO was directed to include it as a comparable. Regarding working capital adjustment, the Tribunal remanded the matter to the AO/TPO for fresh adjudication as per law, allowing the assessee to furnish necessary details. The royalty expenses were held as revenue in nature based on earlier years' decisions. The AO was directed to correctly compute interest u/ss 234D and 244A as per provisions of law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.