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)
Bombay High Court Clarifies Tax Exemption Eligibility for Venture Capital Funds
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has reaffirmed that a Venture Capital Fund (VCF) registered with SEBI is entitled to claim ...
-
Slump sale is transfer of one or more business undertakings for a lump sum consideration, without assigning individual values to the each...
-
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...
-
Facts Centrica India Offshore Private Limited (CIO), an Indian Company, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Centrica Plc, UK Centrica Plc a...
-
The Tax Audit season has started and it’s the time when the Assessees rush to their Chartered Accountants (CA) to get their Tax Audit d...
-
SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd vs. ITSC (Delhi High Court) The assessee entered into a scheme of arrangement u/s 391-394 of the Compani...
-
Facts The taxpayer, a partnership firm, derived income from the business of handling and transport of ship containers, customs clearing a...
-
M/s. Alpha Projects Society P. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) In AY 2005-06, the assessee made payments to contractors & for professi...
-
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...
-
F.No.354/66/2011-TRU Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs...
-
M/s. Merilyn Shipping & Transports vs. ACIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam Special Bench) The assessee incurred brokerage expenses of Rs.38....
No comments:
Post a Comment