Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
ITAT adjudicated a transfer pricing dispute involving intangible asset valuation and arm's length pricing. The tribunal upheld CIT(Appeals)'s methodology, adopting royalty rates of 3.5% for technical know-how and 3% for trademarks based on OECD guidelines. The tribunal rejected TPO's initial Comparable Uncontrolled Price method, finding it unreliable. CIT(Appeals) modified the upward adjustment from Rs. 32,83,64,753/- to Rs. 17,76,95,458/-, specifically applying the adjustment only to Avecia products. The tribunal found no procedural infirmities in CIT(Appeals)' reasoning and confirmed the reduced transfer pricing adjustment, providing partial relief to the assessee while maintaining the core transfer pricing principles.
ITAT adjudicated a transfer pricing dispute involving intangible asset valuation and arm's length pricing. The tribunal upheld CIT(Appeals)'s methodology, adopting royalty rates of 3.5% for technical know-how and 3% for trademarks based on OECD guidelines. The tribunal rejected TPO's initial Comparable Uncontrolled Price method, finding it unreliable. CIT(Appeals) modified the upward adjustment from Rs. 32,83,64,753/- to Rs. 17,76,95,458/-, specifically applying the adjustment only to Avecia products. The tribunal found no procedural infirmities in CIT(Appeals)' reasoning and confirmed the reduced transfer pricing adjustment, providing partial relief to the assessee while maintaining the core transfer pricing principles.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
