Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
The AAR held that the applicant, a commercial entity engaged in constructing metro stations, does not qualify as a "Government Authority" under Paragraph-2(zf) of Notification No. 12/2017-CT (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, as amended. The applicant neither performs functions entrusted to a Municipality under Article 243W nor to a Panchayat under Article 243G of the Constitution, nor has any agreement with the local municipal corporation (BBMP) to carry out such functions. The constructed metro stations remain the exclusive property of the applicant and do not constitute public amenities vested in the local government. Consequently, the grant of concession under the MOU dated 04.06.2018 to the concessionaire is not eligible for GST exemption under the relevant exemption notification, as the fundamental criterion of being a "Government Authority" is not satisfied.
The AAR held that the applicant, a commercial entity engaged in constructing metro stations, does not qualify as a "Government Authority" under Paragraph-2(zf) of Notification No. 12/2017-CT (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, as amended. The applicant neither performs functions entrusted to a Municipality under Article 243W nor to a Panchayat under Article 243G of the Constitution, nor has any agreement with the local municipal corporation (BBMP) to carry out such functions. The constructed metro stations remain the exclusive property of the applicant and do not constitute public amenities vested in the local government. Consequently, the grant of concession under the MOU dated 04.06.2018 to the concessionaire is not eligible for GST exemption under the relevant exemption notification, as the fundamental criterion of being a "Government Authority" is not satisfied.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
