<?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 (7) TMI 963 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212461</link>
    <description>The Tribunal directed the AO to re-compute the Arm&#039;s Length Price (ALP) at 21.97%, differing from the TPO&#039;s 35.26%. The Tribunal accepted the depreciation adjustment on administrative assets and deleted the addition on disallowance of advertisement expenses. The Tribunal&#039;s decisions were upheld, dismissing the appeal with no substantial question of law for High Court interference.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Jun 2013 15:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185871" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (7) TMI 963 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212461</link>
      <description>The Tribunal directed the AO to re-compute the Arm&#039;s Length Price (ALP) at 21.97%, differing from the TPO&#039;s 35.26%. The Tribunal accepted the depreciation adjustment on administrative assets and deleted the addition on disallowance of advertisement expenses. The Tribunal&#039;s decisions were upheld, dismissing the appeal with no substantial question of law for High Court interference.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212461</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>