Comparable selection for software development services depends on functional profiles, software-product activities, significant intangible assets and diversified operations. Foreign exchange gains or losses may be treated as operating items for arm's length margin calculations only when directly linked to international transactions, including operational transactions involving trade debtors and creditors. Comparability findings supported by relevant material, consistent with the applicable transfer pricing rules and free from demonstrated perversity do not raise a substantial question of law. Earlier co-ordinate bench decisions may be relied on where the factual context is relevant and no material distinction is shown.

Revision under section 263 requires an assessment to be both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. A sustainable assessment made after inquiry and verification cannot be revised merely because the revisional authority disagrees with it. Section 54B requires the transferred land to have been used for agricultural purposes during the two years immediately preceding transfer; it does not require agricultural income to be disclosed in returns for those years. Sale deeds and statutory land-revenue records can support evidence of agricultural use.

Arm's length pricing of bagasse transferred from a sugar division to a power division may be supported by market quotations, an electricity tariff price adjusted for the relevant year and a valuation based on the fair and remunerative price of sugarcane; a regulatory fuel price is not necessarily determinative. Irrecoverable advances paid to vendors of a wholly owned subsidiary may qualify as business expenditure where the subsidiary extends the taxpayer's business and the payments serve that business. Direct payment and classification as loans do not by themselves negate commercial expediency. Harvesting and transportation payments forming part of sugarcane purchase costs and deducted from amounts payable to farmers do not attract tax deduction under Section 194C. If they are not part of the purchase cost, a claim that tax was deducted requires verification.

Under substituted section 147, subsequently discovered escaped income may be assessed even if no addition is made on the original ground for reopening. The removal of the words 'and also' and the Explanation permit assessment of such income without fresh compliance with section 148A. Penny-stock trading losses may be disallowed where transactions are found to be colourable and the supporting findings, including unexplained share-price movements unrelated to financial results or market movements, are not rebutted by evidence.

Where a joint remand requires a transfer-pricing reference, the actual reference attracts the additional limitation period under section 153(4). A remand alone is not a deemed reference. If the draft assessment meets the section 153 deadline, sections 144C(12) and (13) govern the subsequent dispute resolution and final assessment periods; section 144C(13A) does not revive an expired draft deadline. Faceless assessment procedure requires communication of proposed prejudicial variations and an effective opportunity to respond before the draft assessment. Arm's length benchmarking under the other method requires comparable uncontrolled transaction prices; cost-based charges require scrutiny of cost pools and allocations. Tested-party selection.....

A TDS-based refund claim raised after settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme, 2020, remained uncrystallised because no departmental order recognised the claimed excess payment. The settlement was based on the taxpayer's own computation, payment of the stipulated tax and issuance of Form No. 5. Recovery after settlement exceeding the amount payable or paid as directed in Form No. 3 must be refunded. Alleged adjustments of refunds from other assessment years against the settled demand require factual verification to establish whether excess recovery occurred.

Satellite transmission receipts are not taxable as process or equipment royalty under domestic law or the India-Singapore tax treaty where customers receive transmission services and bandwidth without control or possession of the satellite or transponder, and no process, know-how or technology is made available to them. The substance of the arrangement, rather than its description as a lease, determines whether customers receive a right to use equipment or a process. Retrospective expansion of the domestic royalty definition does not expand the treaty definition without a corresponding amendment by both contracting countries.

Late-payment surcharges and regulatory assets do not accrue as taxable income where recovery lacks reasonable certainty. Unbilled revenue without such certainty is notional, while revenue already recognised in the succeeding year is excluded. Statutory tariff rates govern valuation of electricity barter transactions. An electricity-distribution business deduction must be claimed in the return; a letter and audit report do not satisfy that requirement. Costs of bringing repaired transformers into working condition form part of the asset block's actual cost for depreciation; repairs without a new asset or capacity increase remain revenue expenditure. Bad debts written off in accounts require no separate proof of irrecoverability. Age and lack.....

Countervailing duty refunds under Section 27(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 require the importer to rebut the presumption under Section 28D that the duty burden was passed on. A chartered accountant's certificate must be considered when supported by books of account and other documents. Invoices showing that the duty was neither recovered from buyers nor reflected in them support rebuttal. Non-claiming of countervailing duty as expenditure does not establish that its burden was passed on.

Personal penalties on customs officers under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 require proof of mens rea and a positive, deliberate act of abetment rendering goods liable to confiscation. Mere negligence, administrative oversight or inefficient performance of official duties does not establish penal abetment, although disciplinary action may follow. Relevant circumstances include the absence of personal benefit or concerted action with exporters, ordinary processing of exporter-generated documents, and prompt disclosure of a clearance completed before a cautionary alert. A later alert cannot retrospectively justify penalising an earlier clearance.

Non-textured brown rice protein powder containing cereal proteins is covered by the specific description under heading 3504 rather than heading 2106. The 90% protein reference for vegetable protein isolates is not a mandatory threshold for separately covered cereal proteins, and the most-akin test under Rule 4 does not apply where earlier classification rules resolve the issue. Customs authorities bear the burden of proving a different classification with reliable evidence. Where goods are correctly described and their classification is known to the department, a differing tariff interpretation alone does not establish suppression or justify the extended limitation period. An incorrect tariff claim alone does not justify confiscation where description and value are accurate; redemption fine cannot be imposed when goods are unavailable for confiscation.

Court-directed customs deposits made towards prospective duty liability are not subject to the statutory limitation or conditions for refund of customs duty under Section 27(1A) where imported goods are released without assessment. A bank guarantee secures the liability but does not constitute payment of customs duty. An inference of final duty determination is not an assessment by the proper officer, so the amounts retain their character as deposits. Refund of those deposits includes applicable interest from the date of deposit until the date of refund.

Seizure of unmarked gold under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 requires reasonable belief based on tangible material and objective circumstances existing at the time of seizure. Unexplained possession combined with purity comparable to domestic gold is insufficient, and without the required belief, the reverse burden under Section 123 cannot be invoked. Confiscation cannot rest solely on retracted statements without independent corroboration of foreign origin and smuggled character; reliance on statements also requires compliance with Section 138B. Penalties for smuggling or abetment require evidence establishing involvement.

Related-party status alone does not justify rejecting the declared transaction value of imported goods. Rule 3(3)(a) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 requires examination of whether the relationship influenced the price. Accepted transaction values of identical or similar goods imported from unrelated suppliers cannot be ignored when assessing related-party imports. Valuation methods must be applied sequentially, exhausting Rules 3 to 5 before resorting to Rules 7 to 9.

Punishment for contempt under section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 requires deliberate disobedience to be established beyond doubt. Evidence of an alleged breach of a restraint on operating company bank accounts may include cheque issuance and bank statements showing encashment or withdrawals. Section 425 of the Companies Act attracts the Contempt of Courts Act, including its appellate remedy under section 19. That remedy is confined to orders punishing for contempt and does not extend to dismissal or discontinuance of contempt proceedings. A contempt applicant acts as an informer; continuation of proceedings rests with the adjudicating forum.

In personal guarantor insolvency proceedings initiated by a creditor under Section 95, appointment of a resolution professional under Section 97 is mandatory. The statutory stages under Sections 95 to 99 do not involve judicial adjudication. Objections to the creditor's locus and the maintainability of the application are determined under Section 100 after the resolution professional submits a report. This includes objections to a minority debenture holder's authority under the debenture trust deed, which cannot be adjudicated at the appointment stage.

Recall for denial of a hearing presupposes an adverse order affecting the applicant. Non-impleadment of an enforcement authority does not justify recall where an order merely directs reconsideration of a resolution-plan proposal, leaves provisional attachment intact and does not adjudicate the authority's rights. Recall cannot be used to rehear or review the merits, replace an available but unavailed statutory appeal, or obtain a fresh declaration excluding attached property from a resolution plan. An unappealed plan-approval order that has attained finality binds stakeholders, including government authorities.

A genuine pre-existing dispute requires rejection of an operational creditor's application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code where it raises a plausible contention requiring further investigation; the defence need not be shown likely to succeed. Contemporaneous correspondence concerning unresolved credit-note adjustments, detention and demurrage claims, and account reconciliation can establish such a dispute. Failure to reply to a demand notice within ten days does not prevent the corporate debtor from producing evidence of a pre-existing dispute. A without-prejudice holding response denying the debt may also constitute notice of dispute, even without specific details.

Money-laundering proceedings founded solely on a scheduled-offence FIR cannot survive when that FIR is quashed. Proceeds of crime must derive from criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence; property linked to a quashed offence cannot independently sustain proceedings based on that offence. An ECIR and consequential proceedings cannot continue on allegations arising solely from proceedings that no longer exist in law. Liberty to revive the ECIR proceedings may be granted if the predicate FIR proceedings are revived.

Review of a criminal writ order directing registration of an FIR is available under Rule 29 of the Madras High Court Writ Rules on the grounds in Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC; the criminal procedure bars on review do not curtail constitutional writ jurisdiction. Recall for denial of hearing depends on entitlement to a hearing and is not limited to orders that leave the merits undecided. A preliminary direction to register an FIR and investigate determines no guilt and need not await every proposed accused's version. Section 175(4) BNSS applies to a Magistrate directing investigation on a complaint and does not create a general right to a hearing before a writ court acting on statutory agency information that prima facie discloses a cognizable off.....