Functional comparability of IT-enabled BPO service providers requires exclusion of entities with materially different business models, including providers that outsource most services, operate at a substantially larger branded scale, perform high-end KPO or engineering-design functions, or lack relevant segmental information. A consistently accepted comparable may remain included where no material distinction exists. These principles supported deletion of the transfer-pricing adjustment. IT-enabled back-office and data-processing services covered by notified activities qualify as export of computer software for the claimed deduction. Where identical deductions were allowed in earlier years and circumstances remain unchanged, the consistency principle supports allowance. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

Section 80JJAA deduction for additional employee cost was allowed to a manpower-services provider because it remained the employer of personnel deployed at customers' premises. Eligible claims for the second and third consecutive years require verification and remain subject to the gross-total-income limit. Chapter VI-A deduction cannot be claimed against income enhanced through an arm's length price adjustment, as the statutory prohibition applies even where the deduction is employee-cost based. Transfer-pricing issues concerning KPO characterisation, Salesforce intra-group service charges, and GAP/GSS programme revenue require fresh examination of functional comparability, supporting documentation, transaction nature and the appropriate pricing method.

Commercially genuine exclusivity payments, transition-fee reimbursements and upfront discounts made to associated enterprises cannot be disregarded merely because their commercial structure is unusual or their expediency is questioned. Arm's length pricing cannot be fixed at nil without applying a prescribed transfer-pricing method; where the underlying primary adjustment fails, consequential notional interest also fails. Secondary-adjustment provisions do not apply to primary adjustments preceding 1 April 2016. Interest on a foreign-currency associated-enterprise loan is benchmarked at LIBOR plus 80 basis points. For exempt-income disallowance, only income-yielding investments are relevant and sufficient own interest-free funds preclude in.....

Negative liens over participating interests in oil and gas blocks and related receivables, created to secure associated enterprises' borrowings, are treated as international transactions where they restrict the asset-owning entity's ability to charge, borrow against, or expand using its operating assets. A lender's security interest may continue despite the borrower entities' bankruptcy. Arm's-length pricing must reflect the negative lien's factual character and resulting impairment of borrowing capacity; averaging bank-guarantee rates or applying loan-benchmarking approaches is not appropriate. The arm's-length price requires fresh determination under applicable transfer-pricing provisions.

One-time clubhouse charges, corpus fund contributions and municipal taxes paid to a developer during acquisition may form part of a residential property's cost of acquisition where they have a direct and proximate nexus with obtaining the asset and its attendant rights. Cost is not limited to the basic sale price; the purpose of each payment, its commercial context and supporting evidence determine its treatment. Clubhouse charges linked to the flat, non-refundable corpus contributions for enduring common infrastructure, and municipal taxes collected during construction may qualify where they are not recurring post-acquisition liabilities. Such amounts are includible in the relevant cost components for capital-gains computation, with consequential indexation where otherwise admissible.

Section 90(2) permits a taxpayer to elect the more beneficial treatment available under domestic tax law or the India-Mauritius DTAA; treaty treatment cannot be imposed where the domestic-law position is more favourable. This principle supports setting off current and brought-forward long-term capital losses on shares acquired before 1 April 2017 against taxable capital gains from shares acquired thereafter. The claimed losses are to be considered in recomputing taxable income where the taxpayer validly exercises the beneficial statutory option.

Welfare-fund contribution deductibility depends on comparing the employer's contribution with gross salary, rather than figures distorted by separate accounting of net salaries and combined employee-employer PF and ESI payments. Contributions remaining within the prescribed ceiling are not treated as excess. Disallowance of expenditure relating to exempt income under section 14A read with rule 8D does not arise where no exempt income is earned. Amounts recovered through customer service bills for canteen and transportation facilities used by deputed employees may qualify as business expenditure when incurred wholly and exclusively for the business and supported by customer-bill records.

FSSAI no-objection certification issued after prescribed laboratory analysis is treated as a conclusive determination that imported food goods conform for human consumption. Customs reclassification should not reopen that food-safety determination through separate testing or seizure after FSSAI clearance. Provisional release conditions based on the proposed contrary classification, including a bank guarantee, are inconsistent with the conclusive effect attributed to the FSSAI clearance. Sale in the open market remains subject to obtaining a fresh FSSAI fitness certificate.

Customs Broker licence-revocation inquiries must permit cross-examination where the charges rely on witnesses' oral evidence. Section 108 authorises Customs officers to summon persons during an inquiry, whereas Section 138B governs the relevance of statements in specified circumstances and principally concerns offences and prosecutions; it does not displace the inquiry safeguards under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations. Regulations 17(3) and 17(4) require relevant oral evidence to be taken and allow the Customs Broker to cross-examine persons examined in support of the charges. Denial of that opportunity is a curable procedural infirmity, for which remand for fresh adjudication after cross-examination may be maintained rather than setting aside the revocation proceedings entirely.

Interest on amounts voluntarily deposited during an investigation and later refunded is payable from the actual payment date until the refund date. The relevant approach treats retention of the investigation deposit as warranting interest throughout that period, irrespective of whether the refund claim itself was sanctioned within three months of filing. Interest was directed at 12% per annum, and the prior rejection of interest on the refunded investigation deposit was overturned.

AIFTA Certificates of Origin may be rejected only through compliance with the domestic verification safeguards in Rules 7(c) and 7(d); suspected fraud does not remove those requirements under Rule 23. Delayed, partial verification and an unauthenticated foreign finding of non-authenticity, without origin test reports, signature evidence or authenticated underlying material, do not establish fraudulent origin or justify denial of preferential tariff treatment. Extended limitation for customs recovery requires proof of the importer's positive collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression, including conscious participation in certificate falsification. Non-culpatory statements and absent evidence of knowledge or fraud do not sustain duty, interest or penalties under the extended period.

Official Liquidator claims arising on a winding-up order remain maintainable if the underlying claim was legally enforceable when winding-up commenced. Limitation runs for three years from the winding-up order under Article 137, while the applicable exclusion for winding-up proceedings and the additional year allowed under the Companies Act produce an aggregate four-year period. A Company Claim instituted within that period is not time-barred, and the preliminary limitation objection fails.

Regulation 20(1) requires a competing acquirer to make its public announcement within 15 working days of the first acquirer's detailed public statement. The period cannot be reckoned from dispatch or advertisement of the first acquirer's letter of offer, because that would disturb the uniform statutory timetable for competing offers and prejudice a compliant first offeror. A competing offer made after that period could not be entertained. Regulation 11 permits exemption only from the obligation to make an open offer; it does not waive procedural requirements or competing-offer timelines. Once the first open offer had concluded, the exemption request was untenable, without preventing a fresh takeover bid under the SAST Regulations.

IBC moratorium protects the corporate debtor but does not suspend or extinguish the personal statutory liability of directors or authorised signatories for cheque dishonour under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Expiry of the payment period after commencement of the moratorium is relevant but not conclusive. Specific allegations concerning the signatory's responsibility, issuance of cheques, and admitted signatures can sustain prosecution despite suspension of the board's powers, which does not retrospectively erase pre-moratorium acts. Defences based on knowledge, due diligence, or appointment of an insolvency professional require trial evidence and cannot ordinarily be determined in quashing proceedings. Accordingly, the moratorium did not bar the cheque-dishonour prosecution.

Approval of a resolution plan freezes and binds claims against the corporate debtor, including claims of central, state and local authorities. Statutory dues that are not included in the plan stand extinguished, and recovery proceedings for dues arising before approval cannot continue. Electricity-duty and mining-related demands were therefore unenforceable where the authorities, despite public notice, neither lodged claims during the corporate insolvency resolution process nor challenged approval of the plan. The outstanding claims were extinguished and the impugned demand notices were quashed.

Rule 5(5) of the 2013 Rules permits acceptance of a fixed deposit in substitution for attached jointly owned immovable property only to the extent of the concerned person's estimated share. Its discretionary wording does not create a general or enforceable right to secure release of PMLA-attached property by offering equivalent security; financial hardship and adequacy of security do not justify mandamus. Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 should not ordinarily bypass the PMLA appellate mechanism where no exceptional circumstance, natural justice breach, jurisdictional error, perversity, or manifest illegality is shown. The writ petition was dismissed, leaving the validity of attachment for the pending statutory appeals.

Attachment of proceeds of crime may extend beyond assets initially identified, including subsequently traced proceeds and property of equivalent value where directly derived property is unavailable. Property acquired before the scheduled offence may be attached where later premium payments or funding are traced to layered proceeds of crime. An inadvertent reference to an unrelated entity does not invalidate attachment where other material establishes the generation and use of tainted funds, and transferable movable property may warrant attachment. Discharge of another person in predicate-offence proceedings does not determine the role of a separate person or the source of attached property. Attachment may reach proceeds held by persons not accused in the predicate offence. The foreign insurance policy's attachment was upheld and the appeal dismissed.

Provisional attachment of properties held by company officials was sustained where they were found to have actively assisted directors in promoting unlawful preference-share schemes, mobilising public investments and diverting proceeds of the scheduled offence. Recorded statements and charge-sheet material linked the officials to the acquisition of properties in their names. Their claim that the properties were purchased solely from salary and incentives was rejected because the attached value was substantially lower than amounts received from the company. The attachment remains subject to the final outcome of the criminal proceedings.

Construction services supplied to the identified statutory bodies qualified for exemption as services provided to governmental authorities because each recipient was created under statute. Denial of exemption to some recipients without reasons, despite acceptance for others with the same status, was set aside. For works-contract exemption applicable from 1 March 2016, the contract had to be entered into before 1 March 2015 and applicable stamp duty paid before that date. Documents subsequently produced to establish compliance required verification, so the affected contracts were remitted for de novo adjudication after allowing reasonable opportunity.

Excise assessment of superior kerosene oil is determined by its form and exemption eligibility at factory removal. Kerosene cleared for sale through the Public Distribution System after satisfying exemption conditions does not become assessable at motor-spirit or high-speed-diesel rates merely because it later forms a pipeline interface beyond the refinery; an administrative circular cannot create liability contrary to governing provisions. The differential-duty demand on interface kerosene was therefore unsustainable. Extended limitation requires evidence of suppression or wilful misstatement with intent to evade duty; departmental ability to inquire and a bona fide belief defeated its use. Without such evidence, penalties against the entities and employee were not imposable.