Rpm Annual Management Agreement: Fill & Download for Free

The Transfer Pricing Laws have been enumerated under Sections 92 to 92F of the Indian Income Tax Act and cover intra-group cross-border transactions. Rules and regulations prescribe that income arising from International Transactions or Specified Domestic Transactions between Associated Enterprises (AE) should be computed using the arm’s-length price principle.“International transactions” refers to transactions between two (or more) AEs involving the sale, purchase or lease of tangible or intangible property, the provision of services or cost-sharing agreements, lending/ borrowing of money or any other transaction having a bearing on the profits, income, losses or assets of such enterprises.The AE category include direct/indirect participation in the management, control, or capital of an enterprise by another enterprise. It also covers situations in which the same person participates in the management, control or capital of both the enterprises.For tax purposes, companies are required to record the exchange of goods using the arms-length principal, which states that the prices charged by the affiliated companies should be equivalent to the prices that would have been charged by a third-party. The following 6 methods are prescribed under the IT Act for the determination of the arm’s-length price:Comparable uncontrolled price (CUP) method;Resale price method (RPM);Cost plus method (CPM);Profit split method (PSM);Transactional net margin method (TNMM);Such other methods as may be prescribed.Taxpayers having aggregate international transactions below the prescribed threshold of INR 1 crore (US$160,000) and Specified Domestic Transactions below the threshold of INR 20 crore are relieved from maintaining the prescribed documentation. However, it is imperative that the documentation maintained should be adequate to substantiate the arm’s-length price of the international transactions or specified domestic transactions.Entities to whom TP regulations are applicable are currently required to file their tax returns on or before 30 November. The prescribed documents must be maintained for a period of eight years from the end of the relevant tax year, and must be updated annually on an ongoing basis.It is also imperative to obtain an Auditors Report in respect of all international transactions and SDT between AEs and the same has to be submitted by the due date of the tax return filing, on or before 30 November.

The Transfer Pricing Laws have been enumerated under Sections 92 to 92F of the Indian Income Tax Act and cover intra-group cross-border transactions. Rules and regulations prescribe that income arising from International Transactions or Specified Domestic Transactions between Associated Enterprises (AE) should be computed using the arm’s-length price principle.“International transactions” refers to transactions between two (or more) AEs involving the sale, purchase or lease of tangible or intangible property, the provision of services or cost-sharing agreements, lending/ borrowing of money or any other transaction having a bearing on the profits, income, losses or assets of such enterprises.The AE category include direct/indirect participation in the management, control, or capital of an enterprise by another enterprise. It also covers situations in which the same person participates in the management, control or capital of both the enterprises.For tax purposes, companies are required to record the exchange of goods using the arms-length principal, which states that the prices charged by the affiliated companies should be equivalent to the prices that would have been charged by a third-party. The following 6 methods are prescribed under the IT Act for the determination of the arm’s-length price:Comparable uncontrolled price (CUP) method;Resale price method (RPM);Cost plus method (CPM);Profit split method (PSM);Transactional net margin method (TNMM);Such other methods as may be prescribed.Taxpayers having aggregate international transactions below the prescribed threshold of INR 1 crore (US$160,000) and Specified Domestic Transactions below the threshold of INR 20 crore are relieved from maintaining the prescribed documentation. However, it is imperative that the documentation maintained should be adequate to substantiate the arm’s-length price of the international transactions or specified domestic transactions.Entities to whom TP regulations are applicable are currently required to file their tax returns on or before 30 November. The prescribed documents must be maintained for a period of eight years from the end of the relevant tax year, and must be updated annually on an ongoing basis.It is also imperative to obtain an Auditors Report in respect of all international transactions and SDT between AEs and the same has to be submitted by the due date of the tax return filing, on or before 30 November.

I wasn’t aware that they did. A car’s maximum speed is rarely something deliberately enforced by the manufacturer or by legislation - in fact, the cases where that holds true are thinly spread enough to be notable as deviations from the norm rather than the other way around. In most cases, it’s the interplay of the engine power, powerband rpm, gearing and aerodynamics that produce the ultimate maximum speed. For example if your engine peaks at about 45hp, around 5000rpm, with a top or max-speed gear not too far either side of 18mph/1000rpm, and it has some passing nod to aero without being particularly advanced, it’ll likely rev out somewhere around 90mph, despite being able to pull higher rpms in the lower gears (but not reaching as high a top speed either in them - because of either deliberate engine speed limiting to prevent damage, or just because most power curves see output steadily fall off after the peak area, or in any higher “overdrive” gear - because it the gearing prevents the engine from turning fast enough to make enough power to go any faster than a particular lower speed).For supercars and hypercars, the figures are altogether higher, but the same holds true. For example, the Bugatti Veyron, original version, has a very sleek body, with adjustable suspension and spoiler settings that make it even more aerodynamic (though less grippy in sharp corners) when you’re aiming for extra high speeds, an immensely powerful engine (upto 1001 horsepower at about 7000rpm), special tyres and an advanced cooling system that can withstand running at ultrahigh speeds and power outputs, and a 7 speed gearbox so that you can have both a gentle starting gear plus a “top” gear which keeps the engine within its safe running range at all times without there being a huge rev drop at each intermediate change… and no suggestion of a speed limiter other than anything the driver themselves might set. With that combination of characteristics, presumably including a 7th gear set around 35 or 36mph/1000rpm (so twice that of our little hatchback example above), it can, with a considerable run-up, manage a little over 400km/h, or 250mph.Why only 250mph vs 90mph, and only a 2x gearing difference, when the power output is 1001 vs 45 and the faster car is more aerodynamic? It’s all down to drag, basically. A little in the drivetrain, a little between the tyres and the road, and a huge amount between the car and the air. Aero is so important because air has a massive braking effect on anything trying to move through it at much more than jogging pace, and the faster you go, the worse it gets, in exponential fashion. Someone else here has described it as being like trying to drive through water when at supercar speeds; I’d contend that’s more like the effect at quick highway speeds (60 to 90mph), given what things feel like from the saddle of a motorcycle. Supercar speeds would be more like pushing through treacle. At the ultracar speeds of the Veyron and its very small band of competitors, it’s somewhat like crashing through a continuous brick wall. Hence the need for a 22x power increase to go less than 3x faster, and why the car, when flat out, will overheat and destroy its tyres in about 15 minutes (they’re rated for rather less than 250mph, because the rating test runs them for an hour at each successively higher speed), but avoid disaster due to its otherwise rather large fuel tanks draining to empty in only 11 (or about 46 miles including acceleration and coasting distance).At more everyday speeds, the effect is lesser, but still detectable. Cruising at 60mph instead of 90 doesn’t need 2/3rds as much power, but less than half. It’s the reason why slowing down saves fuel, because in order to travel the same amount of distance in less time, you have to give over an ever greater fraction of the energy you expend to pushing air out of the way, rather than simply accelerating the car up to speed and raising it over hills (which is what electric cars capture through regeneration; if they ran in a vacuum, and had enough battery capacity to summit any nearby hill, the range of any given electric car could be measured in many thousands of miles to a charge, rather than a couple of hundred at best), until you reach the point where the air drag reduces so much that the other wastes, including that inherent to a running engine and the electrical load of lights and climate control become more important and therefore slowing down (lengthening the journey time) starts to become less efficient.Other demonstrations of this is how older, less well streamlined cars pulled less terminal speed (and much less mpg) out of engines with about the same amount of power, despite being geared more aggressively than modern equivalents, and sometimes even claiming better sprint acceleration times. 45hp in the 1950s might have got you to 75mph, 80 if you were lucky…In-between we have the sportscar and super/hypercar (and supersports bike) maximum speed ranges. Getting over 100mph needs 60-something HP in general (for cars, of typical streamlining; bikes need less, maybe as little as 30, because they have less frontal area for the air to act on). 100hp will see you knocking on the door of 120mph. But 200 will barely get you within spitting distance of 155mph (250km/h), the speed a lot of luxury cars are safety-limited at, and really you need 250 to 300 to reach or exceed it reliably if you don’t have such holdbacks. Knocking onwards towards 200mph needs ever greater increases in output, until you’re easily adding more than 2hp for each mph, rather than getting 2mph to the hp on average all the way up to 90.Typical breakpoints for actual speed limiters are probably around 300km/h and 320km/h (186 and 200mph), dead-on; unless a car (or bike) shows one of these, or another very obviously rounded off km/h or mph figure, it’s unlikely that it’s deliberately limited. Instead it’s simply just that this general range of speed is about the limit of what we can practically manage to reach with a road vehicle that can carry two people (either enclosed and side-by-side, or exposed and in tandem), using an engine and transmission from the top end of currently developed technology that doesn’t take up the entire body space, supplied with a practical (both to carry, and to buy) volume of the best commonly available fuel, and able to steer and stop in a safe manner, within a frame and bodywork outline that’s compatible with both the public highway and the human body and adhering to all common vehicle construction standards… and that can be made at a price affordable to enough people to make its development and sale an overall profitable affair. There’s all kinds of issues over how large an engine you can fit in a frame, how of its volume can be used for combustion chambers, how much torque it can make per cubic centimetre of chamber, how fast it can complete a combustion cycle (and thus what power output that torque is multiplied into) without falling apart, how much waste heat can be disposed of by the cooling system, the overall efficiency of the system in terms of fuel used per kwh output, etc, even before any of the legal issues (emissions, noise, material content, safety etc) are considered.Back in the 50s thru 60s the state of that art progressed from about 100 to 150mph, since when it’s seemed to gradually tail off. In the 80s, the Ferrari F40 was hot property because it could reputedly hit 200mph on a good day. In the mid-late 90s, the McClaren F1 wowed us with a claim of 230mph, and ten years later the Veyron hit 250 (and the Veyron SS pushed that to about 270 more recently, in answer to various other incremental claimants to the Fastest Car crown). But those three were something of a cut above the Jaguar E-type and AC Cobra that made headlines by being 150mph cars which a common man could, with hard work and careful saving, actually aspire to owning, much like a midrange supercar of today (I’m not on a particularly high wage, but if I resigned myself to living in a cardboard box for the next fifteen years, I could probably just about afford a 200mph car … and a 150mph one would only take two or three years… after all, I’ve owned a 120mph car that was literally one month’s wages, though admittedly it was decidedly second hand); they’re more limited edition, super-expensive “halo” machines, sometimes even made and sold at a loss despite their unattainable price tags, in order to be prestigious flagships holding up the company name, and so can attract investment in development and production that would otherwise be considered completely unwarranted. The more “normal” supercars, if that’s in any way a sensible description, still have to live in the real world, with components using no more than a few ppm of exotic minerals rather than being moulded from a pure unobtanium-adamantium alloy, a profit/loss balance sheet firmly in the black, and keeping to all applicable regulations rather than bribing officials to look the other way.And, well, within those boundaries, “200-ish” (or “320km/h-ish”) is about where we’re at. It’s come up from the high one-hundreds, but it hasn’t really gone beyond that yet. Even Porsche make something 911-shaped that can hit the magic number. And depending on your exact budget you can a base model, or a deluxe one with various optional extras… as well as one with the basic workaday engine that’s still good for a thrill but might see you somewhat embarrassed vs a well tuned sleeper sedan on a multi-mile drag race along a desert road, or instead one good for a little MORE than 200, or various points in-between. Naturally people don’t tend to pay much attention to the lower end of that scale, even though opportunities for straight line drag races over several minutes might come along once per lifetime…Don’t take convergent evolution amongst many similar machines as a sign that there’s some kind of deliberate conspiracy to keep the speeds down. At the end of the day, it’s basically where the opposing lines of physics (or technology) and economics cross over at the moment. Each company’s particular situation will cause those lines to vary up or down slightly, but they’ll all be in the same area. If you look at the absolute opposite end of the four-wheeled motoring spectrum, at cheap city runabouts that are engineered to be as fuel efficient and low-emissions as possible whilst still delivering a comfortable cabin, realistic performance (ie we can discount all the weirdo quadricycles with 500cc diesel engines borrowed from building site compressors) and decent crash safety, you’ll find a similar cluster of top speeds as well as retail prices and CO2 emissions figures (which are essentially a certain constant number divided into the combined-cycle MPG).They’re all *aiming* to get the price and emissions/fuel usage as low as possible and most particularly under certain psychological or regulatory breakpoints (e.g. £9999 or less, or under 100g/km and its equivalent, as four figures seems a lot less than five even if the difference is only actually £1, and cars that emit under 100g tend to get big tax breaks in many areas), and keep the performance/comfort/safety as high as possible (eg at least 40kw engine power (about 59hp), 100mph top speed or at least high 90s (so, over 150km/h), under 15s 0–100km/h sprint, 4 or 5 stars in the crash tests, 4 adult sized seats and maybe a 5th “occasional” space, etc). We reached a point a scant few years ago where the tech was advanced enough that it’s possible to satisfy the former whilst not having to really, *really* struggle to do well on all of the latter, so the points on a graph of, say, aggregate performance along the X axis (vmax divided by sprint time?) and financial/environmental cost (£k price multiplied by kg CO2?) on the Y, are turning from a diffuse diagonal spray heading vaguely up and right from about (6,1) (ie 96mph over 16s, and £10k x 0.1kg), to something resembling a set of “waterfall” christmas lights with a horizontal line across from there with various outliers projecting down from it. But that doesn’t mean there’s anything literally capping the price at £10k and the emissions at 100g (my own car would have been £11k new and scores 115g, overall it’s only fractionally more expensive), or even forcing the performance to not fall below those levels (you can, after all, easily get away with less). It’s just those are the psychologically important dividing lines the manufacturers have aimed for when engineering and costing out the machine, whilst also keeping it true to all the other regulations and expectations, and so that’s what the figures very strongly tend towards.As below, so above, and vice versa. Essentially, in any survey of vehicle performance you’ll probably see these kinds of clusters, even with a lot of them showing very similar figures for a particular metric, but it can be as much coincidence, or a natural knock-on effect of engineering something entirely different to meet legal requirements, as a deliberate effort to regulate that particular thing. Heck, it’s most likely that they were trying to push it the OTHER way to reach a certain minimum speed, or improve all other features without the economy falling below a crucial point, and the effect is to produce a graph that looks like the speed is being capped, or that it’s not allowed for the economy to be any *better* than that target…Anyway, now some of the callout examples mentioned originally, which I ended up writing in something of a caffiene deprived haze before realising I’d gone off-point, and before the above, and may as well leave in place simply for curiosity satisfaction.The biggest example maybe is Japan requiring all cars to have a limiter set at 180km/h or less (I believe the requirement for Kei cars is lower, too? Maybe as low as 100, certainly no more than 140?) unless they’re at a racetrack, where it can be legally disabled. This is far enough in advance of their highest national speed limit (100), above a lot of affordable cars’ capabilities, and indeed beyond what most people would find comfortable / feel safe to maintain, that there’s not too much complaint against it … other than from the groups it was implemented to reign in, ie the “midnight club” streetracers who would regularly exceed 300km/h (186mph) on still-open public freeways late at night. Possibly a reason that drifting and mountain-road racing in smaller, slower, but more agile cars became more popular there in the last couple decades. It’s possible to have that limiter illegally removed, of course, but if discovered during the annual safety check or a police spot-check you’ll be in a huge heap of trouble because there’s not much you can do to justify the modification.Or the “gentlemen’s agreement” amongst German luxury and sportscar makers that they would engineer their cars either to redline at, or otherwise be limited to 250km/h (155mph) - though this seems to have drifted towards the 300km/h also implemented by certain supersports motorcycle makers in recent years, to give parity between car and bike - in order to stop the autobahn becoming TOO dangerous a place thanks to very, VERY fast vehicles being in the hands of people maybe not otherwise accustomed to driving at such speeds, and indeed maybe those not inclined or able to take proper care of tyres (or even fit the right *type*, as rubber suitable for more than about 200km/h is expensive), brakes, and indeed steering and suspension parts once the car gets beyond a few years old, as these cars were also generally more upper-middle-class family vehicles or executive company sedans rather than sports specials, and so would lose their value pretty quickly after 5 or maybe 10 years of pounding the tarmac.Plus it acted as a conscious backing-out from a speed and horsepower race that was otherwise starting to get both financially and indeed politically toxic (they have no interest in goading road safety campaigners into *officially* imposing potentially far more restrictive speed limits on the autobahn, which is a continual risk and one that wasn’t helped by the thought of speeds inexorably increasing towards that of aircraft…), and as stated by others it means they could more safely cut a few corners on certain components for the sake of weight and cost reduction. Even travelling at 155mph in a car otherwise fit for maybe 165–170 means you’ll be flat out, not very far from the red line, quite a lot of the time (much like trying to maintain 77 in one only good for 82-85), so it’ll be under quite a bit of strain, and the fuel consumption alone could become a bit of a hazard (at lower speeds, fuel used per unit distance goes up roughly in line with cruising speed; at 100+ it increases even faster) - it’s not really a good idea to end up running out with the engine working hard, or in the middle of fast traffic, on a limited-access highway potentially through the middle of nowhere, and in fact the Germans consider it a minor criminal offense…The cars with the higher limiters tend to be those which are explicitly speed machines, rather than regular cars that happen to be able to go fast just because they’ve been outfitted with engines and transmissions that people consider appropriate to their size and prestige, ie typical supercars or at least higher-end sports cruisers and sporting evolutions of the everyday models. Things where it can be expected the owner has some money behind them, and an interest in driving both fast and, hopefully, driving well, so can be trusted with a few more mph…Other than that you have commercial vehicles like larger delivery vans, heavy trucks, and buses of most kinds, which are limited much lower - typically to their legally defined maxima or a little over, or sometimes a bit below (which then allows for a bit of overrun downhill) - to take the issue of “staying honest” out of the drivers’ hands on longer runs, and *supposedly* improves safety for themselves, any passengers onboard, and all the other roadusers or bystanders who could be hurt or otherwise negatively affected by incidents caused by a large, heavy vehicle running out of control at high speed… (they have a lot more kinetic energy that would need to be brought to a halt, or caused to change direction on bends, and their tyres do a tricky job balancing the need to both hold together at a reasonable running speed whilst also supporting several tonnes of load each… the heavier the load, the more the high speed ability is compromised, and one reasonably valid argument for limiters is that they’ve reduced the number of high-speed blowouts and the accidents caused by them… such even is the reason mobile cranes and super-heavy haulage convoys are typically limited even lower than these, commonly below 50mph… 40, 35, 30… or even 12 in some exceptional cases, where the job is hairy enough that you want “approaching the speed someone can briefly maintain whilst literally running for their life and looking for a ditch to fling themselves into” to be something reached only after the driver realises the brakes have failed and has sounded the alarm, and double figure mph is only realistically achievable on the straightest and flattest of roads anyway, with many hours being spent simply getting round some of the trickier corners)Other cars… it’s not too common. My own turns out to have a 100mph (well, I think 155km/h?) limiter in it, found whilst zapping along in the outside lane of an unexpectedly fast running motorway, despite the manual claiming a top speed around 170~175km/h, but that isn’t really too much of an issue (not common that you want to, or are able to go that fast let alone much more) apart from irking me that the car’s being held back clearly below what it should ultimately be capable of (engine, transmission, brakes, tyres, suspension are all good for it, and even the economy pegged out at about 28mpg when it suddenly stopped accelerating). Possibly a metric conversion hiccup where either it was meant to be 155mph but got entered as km/h, or they did similar as they seem to have done with the cruise control and elective speed limiter and multiplied miles by 1.5 to get a kilometre figure to put in the ECU program, instead of 1.61… (maybe even double, as it’s Japanese, and 180, over 1.61, times 1.5, equals what it claims as the maximum settable limiter speed… which is slightly above the “internal” limiter, and slightly below the claimed vmax).Regardless of the nature and cause of it, it stands out because I’ve not come across another passenger car with similar, other than hearing tell of some auctioned ex-police cruisers in the US turning out to have had the engine detuned and a 99mph limiter installed… closest I’ve experienced is my first car, with a four-speed gearbox and very small, underpowered engine, which was able to run up into the red zone and *almost* onto the rev limiter… but only when pointed down a suitably steep hill and slipstreaming something both larger and faster. (My commuter-spec bike is similar, though at a lower speed, but I do at least have some control over that by having an option to fit different chain sprockets that alter the overall gearing; the current balance which gives decent acceleration, a motorway-safe normalised top speed without getting too close to the redline, and an absolute, rev-limited Vmax that’s technically illegal but still only straddling the line of where the police actually start to pay attention seems like an alright balance…)