Transfer pricing adjustment already captured income, so no further profit attribution to the alleged permanent establishment was warranted.

A transfer pricing adjustment had already examined the relevant transactions at arm's length and captured the income arising from them, leaving no further profit to be attributed to the alleged permanent establishment. On that undisputed factual basis, the Court held that the controversy did not raise any substantial question of law warranting interference. The appeal therefore failed on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal gave rise to any substantial question of law in light of the Tribunal's finding that the relevant transactions had already been examined at arm's length and that no further profit was attributable.

Analysis: The Tribunal's findings treated the transfer pricing adjustment as having already captured the relevant income from the transaction and held that nothing further remained to be attributed to the alleged permanent establishment. The Court noted that, on the undisputed position that profit attribution had already been undertaken, the controversy did not survive as a substantial question of law warranting interference.

Conclusion: No substantial question of law arose; the appeal was not maintainable on merits and failed.

---