Bengaluru ITAT directs
Flipkart India Pvt Ltd. (‘assessee’) to pay 50% of demand of Rs.109.52 Cr and
furnish bank guarantee for balance, relying upon ITAT stay order in Google
India approved "in spirit" by HC, directs registry to advance appeal
hearing date to April 9, 2018; Notes that AO treated the loss incurred as
capital expenditure observing that discounts offered to customers
were intended to build up brand value/monopoly or primacy in the
online market and determined total income at 408 Cr adopting sales price
at which the assessee could have sold the products, based
on comparable profit earned by entities engaged in similar line of
business; ITAT rejects assessee's contention that AO estimated turnover without
rejecting books of accounts and applied TP principles to transactions with
unrelated parties, observes that "AO merely adopted the methodology
to arrive at the value of realization, had the products would have been
sold with profit motive" and thus holds judicial precedents relied on by
assessee to be not applicable; Observes that assessee did not advance any
argument as to patent error in methodology adopted by tax authorities or
rebutting the stand that assessee's loss in the form of discount was nothing
but intangibles; Holds that no case was made out about financial hardship and
"there is every possibility of availability of liquidity in the
company on account of receipt of huge share capital and huge share
premium"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
India-Mauritius DTAA Protocol Notified: Key Tax Implications
The Government of India has notified the amendment to the Protocol of the India-Mauritius Double Tax Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) on 13 Oct...
-
A new website launched for TDS related matters www.tdscpc.gov.in TRACES – T DS R econciliation A nalysis and C orrection E nabling S yste...
-
In a recent informal guidance letter, SEBI clarified whether a cousin of a Promoter Group member qualifies as a person ‘related to promote...
-
Slump sale is transfer of one or more business undertakings for a lump sum consideration, without assigning individual values to the each...
-
Key features of File Validation Utility (FVU) version 3.3 FVU 3.3 will be applicable for quarterly TDS/ TCS statements pertaining to...
-
CIT vs. The Instalment Supply Ltd (Delhi High Court) The assessee bought 1614 items of computer systems for Rs.40 lacs from HCL Hewlett ...
-
Facts The applicant („A‟) is a closely held Public Limited company incorporated in India in the year 1953. A‟s shareholder included A (...
-
01. TDS u/s 194J is required to be done for Royalty also w.e.f 13-7-2006. 02. Royalty had been defined under explanation 2 of se...
-
Until now, 'Samaritans' is not how the Independent Directors are purported by Clause 49 in the Listing agreement. An Independ...
-
1. Concept of “limited liability partnership” LLP is an alternative corporate business form that gives the benefits of limited liability ...
-
SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd vs. ITSC (Delhi High Court) The assessee entered into a scheme of arrangement u/s 391-394 of the Compani...
No comments:
Post a Comment