S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Abnormal events-If an extraordinary event has taken place by way of amalgamation in a company, that company cannot be considered as a comparable-.R-elated party transaction of selected company exceeded limit of 25 per cent, said company be excluded from comparable list-turnover of selected company was almost 80 times more than turnover of assessee-company, said company could not be selected as comparable.

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-High Turnover-Huge intangible addition-Negative working capital-High turnover is a ground for excluding companies as not comparable with a company that has low turnover-Huge intangible assets-Could not be considered for inclusion in list of comparables to software development services provider.-Negative working capital adjustment shall not be made in case of a captive service provider as there is no risk and it is compensated on a total cost plus basis.

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Turnover-Comparable-Companies having turnover of more than 200 crores upto 500 crores have to be regarded as one category and said companies cannot be regarded as comparables with companies having turnover of less than 200 crores.

S. 92BA : Transfer pricing-Specified domestic transactions-Interpretation-Omission of provision-Clause (i) of section 92BA being omitted by Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f. 1-4-2017 from statute, could not be made applicable in pending proceeding of assessee, and therefore, impugned order passed by TPO invoking such section 92BA(i) was without any basis and bad in law, thus, was liable to be quashed. [S. 40A(2)]

S. 68 : Cash credits-Cash payment by purchaser-Sale of agricultural land-Correctness of Ikrarnama-Agreement to sell-Matter remanded.

S. 68 : Cash credits-Share capital-Share premium-Promoters had sufficient funds-Directed to file bank statements of subscribers and copy of returns filed.

S. 68 : Cash credits-Purchase of agricultural land-Investment transferred from personal books of account-Addition is held to be not justified.

S. 54 : Capital gains-Profit on sale of property used for residence-Cost of improvement-Renovation expenses-Enquiry should have conducted with the builder who has constructed the building and not with neighbours-Estimate of Rs. 18 lakhs by CIT(A) is held to be reasonable. [S. 45, 48]

S. 48 : Capital gains-Computation-Cost of improvement-Levelling, boundary work and fencing-Failure to produce evidence-Disallowance of expenditure is justified. [S. 45]

S. 48 : Capital gains-Computation-Indexed cost of acquisition-Holding shares of BSE Ltd-For computing capital gain, indexed cost of acquisition of shares of BSE is to be considered from date of original membership of BSE and not from date of allotment of shares inn BSE Ltd. [S. 2(42A), 45]