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...
Duty-free import benefit for a 100% EOU was denied because export of serpentine products did not satisfy the condition attached to imported marble blocks, as serpentine marble and marble were not similar goods; customs duty was therefore payable on the imports. The extended period of limitation was set aside because the department knew of the imports, exports and DTA clearances, so suppression with intent to evade duty was not proved, and a B-17 bond did not remove the normal limitation rules. Cutting marble blocks into slabs or tiles during the relevant period was held not to amount to manufacture, so the central excise demand failed. Excise duty already paid on DTA clearances was allowed to be adjusted against the surviving customs demand, and confiscation, redemption fine and penalties were set aside.
Duty-free import benefit for a 100% EOU was denied because export of serpentine products did not satisfy the condition attached to imported marble blocks, as serpentine marble and marble were not similar goods; customs duty was therefore payable on the imports. The extended period of limitation was set aside because the department knew of the imports, exports and DTA clearances, so suppression with intent to evade duty was not proved, and a B-17 bond did not remove the normal limitation rules. Cutting marble blocks into slabs or tiles during the relevant period was held not to amount to manufacture, so the central excise demand failed. Excise duty already paid on DTA clearances was allowed to be adjusted against the surviving customs demand, and confiscation, redemption fine and penalties were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
