Refund claim dismissed as time-barred under s.142(5); non-obstante clause read restrictively, merits not decided, self-assessment payments not mere de...
Assessee's project-completion revenue recognition upheld; income addition deleted under Guidance Note/AS-9 and percentage-completion rules as complian...
ITAT held that the TPO's ad-hoc 50% adjustment to RHQ charges lacked a suitable comparable and did not comply with Rule 10AB or section 92C, rendering the benchmarking unsustainable; the TPO failed to apply any prescribed method or to bring a comparable uncontrolled price on record when invoking the "Other Method," and therefore the ALP determination was void. On the facts and law the Tribunal accepted the Taxpayer's aggregation/TNMM as the Most Appropriate Method and directed deletion of the entire transfer-pricing adjustment relating to allocation of RHQ charges, noting the AO/TPO's non-compliance with statutory provisions and absence of rebuttal material from the Revenue.
ITAT held that the TPO's ad-hoc 50% adjustment to RHQ charges lacked a suitable comparable and did not comply with Rule 10AB or section 92C, rendering the benchmarking unsustainable; the TPO failed to apply any prescribed method or to bring a comparable uncontrolled price on record when invoking the "Other Method," and therefore the ALP determination was void. On the facts and law the Tribunal accepted the Taxpayer's aggregation/TNMM as the Most Appropriate Method and directed deletion of the entire transfer-pricing adjustment relating to allocation of RHQ charges, noting the AO/TPO's non-compliance with statutory provisions and absence of rebuttal material from the Revenue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.