S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Once it is held that the property is used by the assessee for business purposes and the Revenue fails to bring on record and evidence to the contrary, it is not open to the TPO to apply ‘Other method’ and determining Nil ALP on the premise that no independent party would have paid any rent for not having occupied the premises-Addition of TP adjustment is deleted. [S. 37(1)]

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-There cannot be a transaction, between independent enterprises, of interest-free debt funding of an overseas SPV by its sponsorer; if such a transaction between independent enterprises is at all hypothetically possible, arm’s length interest on such funding will be ‘nil’-A performance guarantee by SPV, and if such a commitment was reiterated for performance of own obligations, reiteration of this own commitment could not have an arm’s length price. [S. 92A, 92F(ii)]

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Where extraordinary financial event of amalgamation happened in the preceding year and got recorded in books of accounts of the preceding year itself, company cannot be removed from list of comparables for current year on this sole reason, if it is otherwise functionally similar-Inclusion of a government company as comparable by the TPO rejected. [R. 10B]

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Comprables-Exclusion of company from the comparable is set aside-Amount of export incentives is liable to be considered as part of operating revenue-Transfer pricing adjustment is to be restricted only to the extent of international transactions-TPO is directed to grant working capital adjustment as per the methodology suggested by DRP. [S. 144C]

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-CUP method is not the most appropriate method in the facts of the case-Assessing Officer is directed to determine ALP under the TNMM but restricting the amount of adjustment only to the International Transactions. [R. 10B]

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Cup method-Rate at which the distribution company sells the electricity to the customers has to be adopted the transactions relating to transfer of electricity to other units-Purchase made from AE are at arm’s length price and non AE transactions are considered under CUP method.

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Royalty-Net margin is higher than the margin of the comparables, addition was deleted-It is not obligatory for the assessee to demonstrate as to whether or not the international transaction has resulted into economic benefit. [S. 92BF(ii)]

S. 90 : Double taxation relief-Tax credit-Assessing Officer will examine the provisions of the respective tax treaty and compute thee admissible tax credit separately for each jurisdiction-Matter remanded. [S. 37(1), 90(3), 280Z, A297(2)(k), General Clauses Act, S 24]

S. 80P : Co-operative societies-Interest and dividend income-Directed the Assessing Officer to consider de novo and to verify whether assessee had deducted tax at source on interest payment to non-members exceeding Rs. 10,000 per annum. [S. 80P(2)(a)(i), 80P(4)]

S. 80P : Co-operative societies-Souhardasahakari Registered Under Karnataka Souharda Co-Operative Act, 1997-Eligible For Deduction [S. 2(19), 80P(2)(a)(i)]