<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (1) TMI 84 - ITAT, DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202641</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed cross appeals by the revenue and the assessee regarding transfer pricing adjustments for international transactions in the assessment year 2005-06. The assessee&#039;s submission of additional evidence related to comparables and related party transactions was accepted under Rule 29 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. The Tribunal directed a fresh assessment by the Transfer Pricing Officer, incorporating the new evidence and evaluating comparables based on specific factors. Both parties were given a reasonable opportunity for the reassessment, emphasizing the importance of proper comparables and procedural fairness in determining arm&#039;s length pricing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2016 17:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176217" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 84 - ITAT, DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202641</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed cross appeals by the revenue and the assessee regarding transfer pricing adjustments for international transactions in the assessment year 2005-06. The assessee&#039;s submission of additional evidence related to comparables and related party transactions was accepted under Rule 29 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. The Tribunal directed a fresh assessment by the Transfer Pricing Officer, incorporating the new evidence and evaluating comparables based on specific factors. Both parties were given a reasonable opportunity for the reassessment, emphasizing the importance of proper comparables and procedural fairness in determining arm&#039;s length pricing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202641</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>