Composite GST notices, mandatory limitation, and same-subject bar: HC upheld valid notices but quashed overlapping proceedings and unauthorised withho...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3221 to 3240 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
In transfer pricing comparability, Excel Infoways Ltd. was excluded because Tribunal precedent noted low employee cost and fluctuating margins, and that exclusion was upheld. Jindal Intellicom Ltd. was directed to be included in the final comparable set because it had been accepted in the assessee's own earlier year and no material change in functional profile was shown for the relevant year. The Tribunal also held that working capital adjustment must be allowed while giving effect to the order, as differences affecting comparability must be adjusted in the profit margin of independent comparables. Revenue's appeal was dismissed and the assessee's cross-objection was partly allowed.
In transfer pricing comparability, Excel Infoways Ltd. was excluded because Tribunal precedent noted low employee cost and fluctuating margins, and that exclusion was upheld. Jindal Intellicom Ltd. was directed to be included in the final comparable set because it had been accepted in the assessee's own earlier year and no material change in functional profile was shown for the relevant year. The Tribunal also held that working capital adjustment must be allowed while giving effect to the order, as differences affecting comparability must be adjusted in the profit margin of independent comparables. Revenue's appeal was dismissed and the assessee's cross-objection was partly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.