https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212111 The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, ruling that the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) lacked jurisdiction over the Advertising, Marketing, and Promotional (AMP) expenses as they were not referred by the Assessing Officer (AO). The Tribunal directed the AO to remove the addition for AMP expenses, allowed the deduction for incremental balance in the Provision for Losses and Advances (PLA) under section 43B, and permitted the deduction for Consumer Product Research expenses under section 37(1). The Tribunal dismissed the interest levied under sections 234B and 234D as consequential. en-us Wed, 25 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212111 The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, ruling that the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) lacked jurisdiction over the Advertising, Marketing, and Promotional (AMP) expenses as they were not referred by the Assessing Officer (AO). The Tribunal directed the AO to remove the addition for AMP expenses, allowed the deduction for incremental balance in the Provision for Losses and Advances (PLA) under section 43B, and permitted the deduction for Consumer Product Research expenses under section 37(1). The Tribunal dismissed the interest levied under sections 234B and 234D as consequential. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 25 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212111