Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the transfer pricing adjustment for the non-US international transactions should be recomputed by adopting the approach accepted in the Mutual Agreement Procedure for the US transactions and whether the matter should be restored to the Assessing Officer and Transfer Pricing Officer for fresh determination.
Analysis: The adjustment relating to US transactions had already been settled under the Mutual Agreement Procedure between the competent authorities of India and the USA. The parties were heard on whether the same treatment should be extended to the non-US transactions. The Tribunal accepted the Revenue's oral request under Rule 27 and held that, in the absence of a material distinction in the functional and risk profile, the approach adopted in the MAP for the US transactions could be followed for the non-US transactions as well. The Tribunal also directed that the fresh exercise be undertaken after granting the assessee a reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard.
Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the assessee to the extent that the matter was restored for fresh consideration on the same MAP-based approach.