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...
Functional comparability governs software-service benchmarking: dissimilar companies are excluded, while related-party filters, margins and working-ca...
Transfer pricing analysis under External TNMM remained the proper benchmarking method where the earlier remand had already excluded Internal TNMM and limited scrutiny to the comparables selected by the assessee. The text explains that mechanical turnover, export and product-difference filters could not justify wiping out the external comparable set for a limited-risk contract manufacturer earning a cost-plus return, and that comparable selection must reflect functions, assets and risks. It further states that AE and Non-AE segments were not internally comparable because the Non-AE business was entrepreneurial and risk-bearing, while audited segmental accounts could not be reworked absent specific defects. On that basis, the segmental results were restored and the transfer pricing adjustments were deleted.
Transfer pricing analysis under External TNMM remained the proper benchmarking method where the earlier remand had already excluded Internal TNMM and limited scrutiny to the comparables selected by the assessee. The text explains that mechanical turnover, export and product-difference filters could not justify wiping out the external comparable set for a limited-risk contract manufacturer earning a cost-plus return, and that comparable selection must reflect functions, assets and risks. It further states that AE and Non-AE segments were not internally comparable because the Non-AE business was entrepreneurial and risk-bearing, while audited segmental accounts could not be reworked absent specific defects. On that basis, the segmental results were restored and the transfer pricing adjustments were deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
