Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefi...
Continuing offence of money-laundering: discharge set aside and proceedings reinstated where laundering continued after inclusion of predicate offence...
Transfer pricing dispute over benchmarking of a guarantee commission: the article explains that the tax authority applied an ad hoc upward adjustment using a CUP-based market rate, but a tribunal relied on earlier coordinate-bench analysis that the combined guarantee fee approximated 0.69% and the assessee's allocated share (about 57%) reflected limited functions, absence of independent risk-bearing, and a back-to-back counter guarantee; applying that reasoning the tribunal found the TPO/DRP ad hoc rate untenable and deleted the upward transfer pricing adjustment to the guarantee commission for the year under review.
Transfer pricing dispute over benchmarking of a guarantee commission: the article explains that the tax authority applied an ad hoc upward adjustment using a CUP-based market rate, but a tribunal relied on earlier coordinate-bench analysis that the combined guarantee fee approximated 0.69% and the assessee's allocated share (about 57%) reflected limited functions, absence of independent risk-bearing, and a back-to-back counter guarantee; applying that reasoning the tribunal found the TPO/DRP ad hoc rate untenable and deleted the upward transfer pricing adjustment to the guarantee commission for the year under review.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
