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 Tribunal deleted the transfer pricing adjustment on corporate guarantee fee, holding that 0.25% was already accepted in the assessee's own earlier years and the higher rate was unsupported. It also deleted the adjustment on software cost allocation, rejecting re-characterisation of a cost-to-cost transaction as intra-group services. For electricity transfer pricing, it held that SEB rates were the proper benchmark and remanded the matter for verification and fresh determination. The duplicate disallowance under section 80-IA was held unsustainable, and the section 14A disallowance was deleted because no exempt income was earned. The section 115JB adjustment on education cess and interest under section 234A were both remanded for fresh verification.
The Tribunal deleted the transfer pricing adjustment on corporate guarantee fee, holding that 0.25% was already accepted in the assessee's own earlier years and the higher rate was unsupported. It also deleted the adjustment on software cost allocation, rejecting re-characterisation of a cost-to-cost transaction as intra-group services. For electricity transfer pricing, it held that SEB rates were the proper benchmark and remanded the matter for verification and fresh determination. The duplicate disallowance under section 80-IA was held unsustainable, and the section 14A disallowance was deleted because no exempt income was earned. The section 115JB adjustment on education cess and interest under section 234A were both remanded for fresh verification.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
