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...
Software licence, database support and related IT expenditure was held to be revenue in nature because it secured only a limited right to use software, with no acquisition of proprietary or copyright rights and no independent enduring asset. Applying the principle from Engineering Analysis, the Tribunal treated the payments as facilitating day-to-day business operations and upheld deletion of the disallowance. On year-end provisions, the Tribunal held that repeated disallowance of the same item would create impermissible double disallowance; the matter was restored for limited verification of prior disallowance or tax deduction and corresponding relief to prevent duplication.
Software licence, database support and related IT expenditure was held to be revenue in nature because it secured only a limited right to use software, with no acquisition of proprietary or copyright rights and no independent enduring asset. Applying the principle from Engineering Analysis, the Tribunal treated the payments as facilitating day-to-day business operations and upheld deletion of the disallowance. On year-end provisions, the Tribunal held that repeated disallowance of the same item would create impermissible double disallowance; the matter was restored for limited verification of prior disallowance or tax deduction and corresponding relief to prevent duplication.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
