<?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>2013 (9) TMI 304 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236871</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision in favor of the assessee, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal. The Tribunal found that the Transfer Pricing Officer&#039;s comparison for Arm&#039;s Length Price (ALP) was flawed and arbitrary, supporting the appellant&#039;s transactions as being at ALP. Additionally, the other issues raised by the Revenue were dismissed for want of prosecution as they were not argued during the hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Sep 2013 09:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=199278" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (9) TMI 304 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236871</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision in favor of the assessee, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal. The Tribunal found that the Transfer Pricing Officer&#039;s comparison for Arm&#039;s Length Price (ALP) was flawed and arbitrary, supporting the appellant&#039;s transactions as being at ALP. Additionally, the other issues raised by the Revenue were dismissed for want of prosecution as they were not argued during the hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236871</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>