Cisco Systems Capital (India) Private Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) The assessee grievance is bundled approach for benchmarking should be accepted. At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the TPO has accepted the bundled approach of aggregation of payment of fees for administrative support services in the preceding years (i.e. from the incorporation year […]
The TPO and DRP erred in treating CCDs as ECBs and benchmarked the interest rate against LIBOR rate. The CCDs is a hybrid instrument and cannot be per se treated as ECB / loan.
An undisclosed foreign bank account per se can indeed be treated as an asset under section 2(11) of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income & Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act 2015.
So far as profit attribution of a DAPE is concerned, the legal position is that as long as an agent is paid an arm’s length remuneration for the services rendered, nothing survives for taxation in the hands of the dependent agency permanent establishment.
In our view no addition under section 68 of the Act on account of share capital could have been made only if addition under section 56 of the Act on share premium was also made. This is because Assessing Officer had no reasons to belief that income has escaped assessment under section 68 of the Act being cash credit on account of share premium or share application money or share capital as the case may be.
If AO, after passing an assessment order, finds something amiss in it to the detriment of the Revenue, he has ample power to either reassess the earlier assessment in terms of section 147 or carry out rectification u/s 154 of the Act. He can’t usurp the power of the CIT and recommend a revision.
The quantification of loss, which is well beyond the limited scope of ‘mistake apparent on record’ under section 154], could not have been disturbed in the proceedings under section 154, and what cannot be done under section 154, cannot be done under section 263 r.w.s. 154 either.
Approval granted by superior authority in mechanical manner solely relying upon the implied undertaking obtained from AO in the form of draft assessment order, defeated the very purpose of obtaining approval under section 153D and consequently, impugned assessment relatable to search was non est and a nullity and was, therefore, quashed.
Draipl-Mskel (JV) Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) In the present case, the expense claimed by the assessee for interest was disallowed by the AO on account of non-deduction of TDS. The disallowance made by the AO was also subsequently confirmed by the learned CIT (A). Now, the issue which require consideration and the adjudication is whether […]
The Hon’ble ITAT deleted the transfer pricing adjustment on account of interest on receivables due to failure of revenue authorities to find out even a single comparable in assessee’s segment charging interest in uncontrolled market conditions.
