Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
Cross country pipeline classification and ITC entitlement: pipelines outside factory treated as immovable, ITC disallowed under Section 17 restriction...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6181 to 6200 of 96177 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 issue concerned royalty paid to an associated enterprise where the adjustment was negated in favour of the taxpayer because the earlier appellate decision in the taxpayer's own case on the same issue precluded fresh adjustment; the assessing officer had relied on a prior TPO finding but the appellate precedent established nil ALP, resulting in relief. Separately, claim for deduction under the industrial/infrastructure undertaking provision for participation in a micro irrigation project was allowed after the taxpayer produced execution copies, invoices, payments and certificates; a typographical error in the agreement party name was held not to defeat entitlement and the revenue failed to rebut the evidence.
Transfer pricing issue concerned royalty paid to an associated enterprise where the adjustment was negated in favour of the taxpayer because the earlier appellate decision in the taxpayer's own case on the same issue precluded fresh adjustment; the assessing officer had relied on a prior TPO finding but the appellate precedent established nil ALP, resulting in relief. Separately, claim for deduction under the industrial/infrastructure undertaking provision for participation in a micro irrigation project was allowed after the taxpayer produced execution copies, invoices, payments and certificates; a typographical error in the agreement party name was held not to defeat entitlement and the revenue failed to rebut the evidence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.