<?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>2010 (10) TMI 693 - ITAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206741</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found in favor of the assessee in the appeal concerning the computation of Arm&#039;s Length Price (ALP) under the Income Tax Act for the A.Y. 2003-04. The Transfer Pricing Officer&#039;s adjustment was challenged due to lack of opportunity to respond to data used, rejection of a comparable company, and failure to consider adjusted net profit margin. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, citing violations of natural justice by the TPO, lack of transparency, and remanded the ALP determination issue for fresh adjudication. The appeal was partly allowed, and the additional ground on interest levy under Section 234D was decided in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Aug 2012 12:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=180225" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (10) TMI 693 - ITAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206741</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found in favor of the assessee in the appeal concerning the computation of Arm&#039;s Length Price (ALP) under the Income Tax Act for the A.Y. 2003-04. The Transfer Pricing Officer&#039;s adjustment was challenged due to lack of opportunity to respond to data used, rejection of a comparable company, and failure to consider adjusted net profit margin. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, citing violations of natural justice by the TPO, lack of transparency, and remanded the ALP determination issue for fresh adjudication. The appeal was partly allowed, and the additional ground on interest levy under Section 234D was decided in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206741</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>