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...
Page of 4902
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 98021 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Transaction-specific investigation information identifying the taxpayer, supplier and disputed transaction can support reassessment under the substituted regime after pre-notice procedure; its Investigation Wing origin alone does not make it vague. A retrospective clarification permits a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to issue the reassessment notice. Where corresponding sales, purchase records and banking evidence exist but the named supplier is untraceable and does not comply, purchases cannot be wholly disallowed; absent evidence that payments returned in cash, addition is limited to the embedded profit. The disputed-purchase addition was restricted to 6%. A monetary-limit exception for departmental appeals affects maintainability but does not itself require vacating the appellate order or remanding assessment.
Transaction-specific investigation information identifying the taxpayer, supplier and disputed transaction can support reassessment under the substituted regime after pre-notice procedure; its Investigation Wing origin alone does not make it vague. A retrospective clarification permits a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to issue the reassessment notice. Where corresponding sales, purchase records and banking evidence exist but the named supplier is untraceable and does not comply, purchases cannot be wholly disallowed; absent evidence that payments returned in cash, addition is limited to the embedded profit. The disputed-purchase addition was restricted to 6%. A monetary-limit exception for departmental appeals affects maintainability but does not itself require vacating the appellate order or remanding assessment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
