Tariff classification determines GST schedule and rate; beverages in Schedule III attract the higher rate, tea extracts and syrups in Schedule I attra...
Fraudulent trading requires cogent evidence of intent to defraud; ordinary-course payments protected, except post-insolvency withdrawals must be resto...
Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Transfer pricing adjustment arising from royalty payments requires benchmarking by the most appropriate traditional transaction method; where exact identical comparables exist the CUP method should be applied, but selected comparables must be functionally comparable and not mere local manufacturers or brand developers. The impugned comparables were held inappropriate and the matter is remitted to AO/TPO to re-benchmark afresh after affording the assessee hearing and considering the submitted TPAR; if no exact comparables receiving bundled services are found, benchmarking should proceed under TNMM using proper comparables.
Transfer pricing adjustment arising from royalty payments requires benchmarking by the most appropriate traditional transaction method; where exact identical comparables exist the CUP method should be applied, but selected comparables must be functionally comparable and not mere local manufacturers or brand developers. The impugned comparables were held inappropriate and the matter is remitted to AO/TPO to re-benchmark afresh after affording the assessee hearing and considering the submitted TPAR; if no exact comparables receiving bundled services are found, benchmarking should proceed under TNMM using proper comparables.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.