Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The ITAT ruled in favor of the appellant regarding transfer pricing of electricity from its captive power plants to its cement unit. The Tribunal rejected the TPO's benchmarking based on supplies by various power companies, finding that electricity pricing is a regulated activity and therefore not an "uncontrolled condition" suitable for CUP method comparison. Following M/s. Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. (SC, 2023), the ITAT held that the appropriate benchmark was the rate charged by the State Electricity Board (AVVNL) to industrial consumers. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant's transfer price of Rs. 7.40 per unit represented ALP, and directed the deletion of adjustments proposed by the TPO and confirmed by the DRP.
The ITAT ruled in favor of the appellant regarding transfer pricing of electricity from its captive power plants to its cement unit. The Tribunal rejected the TPO's benchmarking based on supplies by various power companies, finding that electricity pricing is a regulated activity and therefore not an "uncontrolled condition" suitable for CUP method comparison. Following M/s. Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. (SC, 2023), the ITAT held that the appropriate benchmark was the rate charged by the State Electricity Board (AVVNL) to industrial consumers. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant's transfer price of Rs. 7.40 per unit represented ALP, and directed the deletion of adjustments proposed by the TPO and confirmed by the DRP.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
