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 CESTAT held that for refunds filed under the Central Excise Act, 1944, interest on delayed refunds is governed by Section 11BB and would be payable from the date of deposit made by the assessee, as per the Supreme Court's decision in Ranbaxy case. The appeal filed by the assessee against the adjudicating authority's order, which had calculated interest from the deposit date, was dismissed.
The CESTAT held that for refunds filed under the Central Excise Act, 1944, interest on delayed refunds is governed by Section 11BB and would be payable from the date of deposit made by the assessee, as per the Supreme Court's decision in Ranbaxy case. The appeal filed by the assessee against the adjudicating authority's order, which had calculated interest from the deposit date, was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
