Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The HC upheld the ITAT's decision affirming the arm's length price (ALP) determination for power supplied by a captive power plant (CPP) to non-eligible units using the internal comparable uncontrolled price (CUP) method. The court emphasized that the assessee's CPP, established primarily for self-consumption and cost savings, differs fundamentally from commercial power generators and State Electricity Boards (SEBs). Consequently, ALP cannot be benchmarked against SEB supply rates to distribution companies. The HC relied on the Electricity Act provisions granting CPPs open access rights and regulatory exemptions, reinforcing that CPP transactions reflect mutually agreed rates distinct from SEB tariffs. The ruling disapproved reliance on external CUPs or precedents inconsistent with current statutory frameworks. The revenue's appeal was dismissed, validating the internal CUP method as the most appropriate, robust, and reliable approach for transfer pricing of CPP power sales under the Income Tax Act and associated rules.
The HC upheld the ITAT's decision affirming the arm's length price (ALP) determination for power supplied by a captive power plant (CPP) to non-eligible units using the internal comparable uncontrolled price (CUP) method. The court emphasized that the assessee's CPP, established primarily for self-consumption and cost savings, differs fundamentally from commercial power generators and State Electricity Boards (SEBs). Consequently, ALP cannot be benchmarked against SEB supply rates to distribution companies. The HC relied on the Electricity Act provisions granting CPPs open access rights and regulatory exemptions, reinforcing that CPP transactions reflect mutually agreed rates distinct from SEB tariffs. The ruling disapproved reliance on external CUPs or precedents inconsistent with current statutory frameworks. The revenue's appeal was dismissed, validating the internal CUP method as the most appropriate, robust, and reliable approach for transfer pricing of CPP power sales under the Income Tax Act and associated rules.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.