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" ?
Functional comparability is essential in transfer pricing analysis, and a government-owned enterprise with broader consultancy and project execution functions cannot be compared with a captive technical support provider. HSCC India Ltd. was excluded because it rendered comprehensive health-sector consultancy, served government ministries and agencies, and enjoyed advantages flowing from its governmental character; the absence of a subsidy did not make it comparable. Mitcon Consultancy and Engineering Services Ltd. was also excluded because it had diversified operations across multiple sectors and lacked reliable segmental revenue data in its signed accounts, making a valid comparison impossible. The assessee's appeal was allowed and the transfer pricing exercise was to proceed after excluding both entities.
Functional comparability is essential in transfer pricing analysis, and a government-owned enterprise with broader consultancy and project execution functions cannot be compared with a captive technical support provider. HSCC India Ltd. was excluded because it rendered comprehensive health-sector consultancy, served government ministries and agencies, and enjoyed advantages flowing from its governmental character; the absence of a subsidy did not make it comparable. Mitcon Consultancy and Engineering Services Ltd. was also excluded because it had diversified operations across multiple sectors and lacked reliable segmental revenue data in its signed accounts, making a valid comparison impossible. The assessee's appeal was allowed and the transfer pricing exercise was to proceed after excluding both entities.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.