Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.