<?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 (3) TMI 898 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216229</link>
    <description>Transfer pricing assessment concerned determination of arm&#039;s length price for cross-border software supply. The transactional net margin method was adopted after cost-plus documentation was inadequate; comparability analysis under rule 10C excluded four alleged comparables as operating in different lines of business, leaving a single comparable. The proviso allowing the arithmetical mean (or assessee&#039;s 5% variation) applies only when more than one price is determined by the most appropriate method; it therefore did not apply here, and the ALP was fixed based on the sole comparable, resulting in dismissal of the revenue appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2026 17:20:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=189612" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (3) TMI 898 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216229</link>
      <description>Transfer pricing assessment concerned determination of arm&#039;s length price for cross-border software supply. The transactional net margin method was adopted after cost-plus documentation was inadequate; comparability analysis under rule 10C excluded four alleged comparables as operating in different lines of business, leaving a single comparable. The proviso allowing the arithmetical mean (or assessee&#039;s 5% variation) applies only when more than one price is determined by the most appropriate method; it therefore did not apply here, and the ALP was fixed based on the sole comparable, resulting in dismissal of the revenue appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216229</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>