Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
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...
The HC declined to entertain the petition challenging the Tribunal's decision under Section 254(2) regarding TP adjustment for guarantee fees paid to an Associated Enterprise. The Court noted that the Tribunal had decided Ground No.4 in favor of the Assessee based on a precedent from the Gujarat HC [2018] that confirmed a similar ruling for an earlier assessment year (2009-10). The Court determined it would be an academic exercise to evaluate the Tribunal's power to recall its order under Section 254(2) when the HC had already approved similar findings in the previous assessment year, thereby implicitly validating the Tribunal's conclusion rejecting the upward TP adjustment of guarantee fees.
The HC declined to entertain the petition challenging the Tribunal's decision under Section 254(2) regarding TP adjustment for guarantee fees paid to an Associated Enterprise. The Court noted that the Tribunal had decided Ground No.4 in favor of the Assessee based on a precedent from the Gujarat HC [2018] that confirmed a similar ruling for an earlier assessment year (2009-10). The Court determined it would be an academic exercise to evaluate the Tribunal's power to recall its order under Section 254(2) when the HC had already approved similar findings in the previous assessment year, thereby implicitly validating the Tribunal's conclusion rejecting the upward TP adjustment of guarantee fees.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.