<?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>2014 (9) TMI 276 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251250</link>
    <description>Transfer pricing adjustments for software development and marketing support services were remanded for fresh arm&#039;s length pricing because the earlier tribunal direction required first testing the CUP method, with TNMM only if CUP was inapplicable, and complete AE transaction details had to be furnished for a proper comparability analysis. UPS and computer peripherals were treated as part of the computer system for depreciation purposes, so the higher 60% depreciation claim was allowed. Management fee paid to the foreign associated enterprise was not disallowed under section 40(a)(i) because the treaty, being more beneficial, applied; the services did not make available technical knowledge and were not attributable to an Indian PE, so no TDS obligation arose.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2014 12:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=364795" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 276 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251250</link>
      <description>Transfer pricing adjustments for software development and marketing support services were remanded for fresh arm&#039;s length pricing because the earlier tribunal direction required first testing the CUP method, with TNMM only if CUP was inapplicable, and complete AE transaction details had to be furnished for a proper comparability analysis. UPS and computer peripherals were treated as part of the computer system for depreciation purposes, so the higher 60% depreciation claim was allowed. Management fee paid to the foreign associated enterprise was not disallowed under section 40(a)(i) because the treaty, being more beneficial, applied; the services did not make available technical knowledge and were not attributable to an Indian PE, so no TDS obligation arose.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251250</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>