Head Office cost allocation requires prescribed transfer-pricing methods; treaty ceilings bar surcharge and cess, while duplicate taxation is excluded...
Cost-to-cost reimbursement of seconded employees is not service consideration; transfer-pricing markup was deleted and amalgamation amortisation allow...
Crystallisation of liability supports prior-period expense deduction, while functionally distinct divisions require separate transfer-pricing benchmar...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires transaction-specific FAR analysis before benchmarking business-support services provided to associated en...
Advance pricing agreement methodology can guide benchmarking for non-covered years when functions, assets, risks and activities remain materially unch...
Tax-audit exemption for substantially State-funded educational universities prevents audit-failure penalties where income qualifies for statutory exem...
Functional, asset and risk analysis excludes diversified technology companies from captive software development comparables under cost-plus arrangemen...
Cash-payment disallowance under section 40A(3) depends on whether payments exceeding the prescribed daily limit were made to a single person, not merely on a voucher exceeding that limit. A consolidated voucher may record separate payments to multiple persons, each within the limit, and therefore may not establish a contravention. Supporting material omitted by an erstwhile tax consultant was admitted as additional evidence because the first appellate order had been passed without it. The ex parte appellate order and cash-payment disallowance were set aside and remitted to the Assessing Officer for verification and fresh adjudication, with all contentions left open.
Cash-payment disallowance under section 40A(3) depends on whether payments exceeding the prescribed daily limit were made to a single person, not merely on a voucher exceeding that limit. A consolidated voucher may record separate payments to multiple persons, each within the limit, and therefore may not establish a contravention. Supporting material omitted by an erstwhile tax consultant was admitted as additional evidence because the first appellate order had been passed without it. The ex parte appellate order and cash-payment disallowance were set aside and remitted to the Assessing Officer for verification and fresh adjudication, with all contentions left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4918 
