Regulatory consolidation for investment advisers: SEBI issues master circular consolidating guidance and prescribing compliance, reporting, fees and s...
Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
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.