https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233634 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)'s order and deleting the addition of Rs.58,09,820 made by the AO due to transfer pricing adjustment on account of payment of royalty. The Tribunal found that the Taxation Officer had exceeded jurisdiction by recommending disallowance without determining the arms-length price, emphasizing that the royalty payment was a legitimate business expense based on the nature of the activities and the history of similar cases in prior assessment years. en-us Wed, 10 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Apr 2013 17:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233634 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)'s order and deleting the addition of Rs.58,09,820 made by the AO due to transfer pricing adjustment on account of payment of royalty. The Tribunal found that the Taxation Officer had exceeded jurisdiction by recommending disallowance without determining the arms-length price, emphasizing that the royalty payment was a legitimate business expense based on the nature of the activities and the history of similar cases in prior assessment years. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233634