Appeal allowed: conversion treated as manufacture, entitlement under Notification No.56/2002-CE and CENVAT credits reinstated, including returned and ...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
10141 to 10160 of 96587 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT held that the revenue authority's transfer pricing segmentation and revenue-based cost allocation were unsustainable. The Tribunal found the taxpayer's core trading activities and attendant after-sales services to be functionally integrated and interdependent, with many services performed with assistance of its associated enterprise (foreign principal), and therefore incapable of reliable segregation for separate benchmarking. The TPO's unilateral bifurcation and allocation by gross revenue, without analysing functions, risks and manpower, was quashed. Consequently the TP adjustment on ground No. 3 was disallowed and the taxpayer's appeal allowed, with directions that no revenue-based segmental allocation be applied absent a proper functional and risk analysis.
The ITAT held that the revenue authority's transfer pricing segmentation and revenue-based cost allocation were unsustainable. The Tribunal found the taxpayer's core trading activities and attendant after-sales services to be functionally integrated and interdependent, with many services performed with assistance of its associated enterprise (foreign principal), and therefore incapable of reliable segregation for separate benchmarking. The TPO's unilateral bifurcation and allocation by gross revenue, without analysing functions, risks and manpower, was quashed. Consequently the TP adjustment on ground No. 3 was disallowed and the taxpayer's appeal allowed, with directions that no revenue-based segmental allocation be applied absent a proper functional and risk analysis.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.