Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
ITAT ruled AMP expenses did not constitute international transaction under Section 92B, as Revenue failed to establish existence of arrangement between assessee and AE regarding AMP expenses. Following precedents from Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. and Bausch & Lomb cases, ITAT determined Transfer Pricing Officer lacked authority to make adjustments under Chapter X absent machinery provisions for AMP expenses. However, on excess refund claim, ITAT ruled against assessee, upholding that DTAA provisions are inapplicable when domestic company pays DDT under Section 115-O, following Total Oil India precedent. Appeal partially allowed favoring assessee on AMP issue while dismissing excess refund claim.
ITAT ruled AMP expenses did not constitute international transaction under Section 92B, as Revenue failed to establish existence of arrangement between assessee and AE regarding AMP expenses. Following precedents from Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. and Bausch & Lomb cases, ITAT determined Transfer Pricing Officer lacked authority to make adjustments under Chapter X absent machinery provisions for AMP expenses. However, on excess refund claim, ITAT ruled against assessee, upholding that DTAA provisions are inapplicable when domestic company pays DDT under Section 115-O, following Total Oil India precedent. Appeal partially allowed favoring assessee on AMP issue while dismissing excess refund claim.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
