Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The HC dismissed the Revenue's appeals, upholding the Tribunal's determination that the internal comparable uncontrolled price methodology was the most appropriate method for benchmarking inter-company supply of power from captive plants to non-eligible units. The Court held that market value for industrial consumers must be measured by the rates at which State Electricity Boards supply power to consumers (for purposes of Section 80IA) rather than rates at which power is sold to the Boards, and that negotiated captive-to-consumer pricing can settle below generator expectations in an unregulated transaction. The HC also affirmed application of a 0.5% corporate guarantee fee as the arm's-length benchmark, rejecting Revenue's challenge to that finding.
The HC dismissed the Revenue's appeals, upholding the Tribunal's determination that the internal comparable uncontrolled price methodology was the most appropriate method for benchmarking inter-company supply of power from captive plants to non-eligible units. The Court held that market value for industrial consumers must be measured by the rates at which State Electricity Boards supply power to consumers (for purposes of Section 80IA) rather than rates at which power is sold to the Boards, and that negotiated captive-to-consumer pricing can settle below generator expectations in an unregulated transaction. The HC also affirmed application of a 0.5% corporate guarantee fee as the arm's-length benchmark, rejecting Revenue's challenge to that finding.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
