Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Condonation of delay in filing GSTR-3B returns and entitlement to Section 62 benefit results in withdrawal of assessments and revocation of attachment...
Transfer pricing dispute over benchmarking of AMP expenses and appropriate ALP method: the Bright Line Test (BLT) adjustments are held legally unsustainable and deleted; the Cost Plus method is rejected as unjustified because the assessee acted as a distributor incurring routine business promotion and employee costs that should form part of trading cost; the tribunal accepts comparability under adjusted TNMM and directs an ALP uplift equal to the difference between the comparable PLI and the assessee's margin, instructing the AO to compute and apply that limited adjustment in line with the cited Sony Ericsson precedent.
Transfer pricing dispute over benchmarking of AMP expenses and appropriate ALP method: the Bright Line Test (BLT) adjustments are held legally unsustainable and deleted; the Cost Plus method is rejected as unjustified because the assessee acted as a distributor incurring routine business promotion and employee costs that should form part of trading cost; the tribunal accepts comparability under adjusted TNMM and directs an ALP uplift equal to the difference between the comparable PLI and the assessee's margin, instructing the AO to compute and apply that limited adjustment in line with the cited Sony Ericsson precedent.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.