Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
The ITAT dismissed challenges to any question of law regarding disallowance of royalty paid by the assessee to its AE, holding that the TPO's role is confined to determining arm's-length price and not to interrogate commercial efficacy; factual findings that manufacturers were subcontractors and no royalty was paid abroad remain uncontroverted. Transfer-pricing adjustments to AMP expenses (both substantive and protective) are deleted, the Tribunal's application of both the intensity approach and the BLT being held not in accordance with law. The assessee's method of valuing opening and closing stock at cost or net realisable value is upheld. The claim for a lower rate of DDT is rejected and decided against the assessee.
The ITAT dismissed challenges to any question of law regarding disallowance of royalty paid by the assessee to its AE, holding that the TPO's role is confined to determining arm's-length price and not to interrogate commercial efficacy; factual findings that manufacturers were subcontractors and no royalty was paid abroad remain uncontroverted. Transfer-pricing adjustments to AMP expenses (both substantive and protective) are deleted, the Tribunal's application of both the intensity approach and the BLT being held not in accordance with law. The assessee's method of valuing opening and closing stock at cost or net realisable value is upheld. The claim for a lower rate of DDT is rejected and decided against the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.