Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
The HC upheld the tribunal's rejection of limitation, holding that the cause of action arose when the additional cost crossed the contractual threshold and the claim was thereafter pursued through the contractual mechanism and arbitration. However, it set aside the award for patent illegality and want of reasons because the claimant produced no evidence of actual tax payment at the enhanced rates, no proof of the contractual annual deduction, and a claim statement could not itself prove the claim. The tribunal also failed to consider the material defence that service tax was not leviable under the relied-upon notifications, rendering the award unreasoned and unsustainable.
The HC upheld the tribunal's rejection of limitation, holding that the cause of action arose when the additional cost crossed the contractual threshold and the claim was thereafter pursued through the contractual mechanism and arbitration. However, it set aside the award for patent illegality and want of reasons because the claimant produced no evidence of actual tax payment at the enhanced rates, no proof of the contractual annual deduction, and a claim statement could not itself prove the claim. The tribunal also failed to consider the material defence that service tax was not leviable under the relied-upon notifications, rendering the award unreasoned and unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
