<?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>2015 (5) TMI 821 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259947</link>
    <description>AMP transfer pricing requires a comparability-based arm&#039;s length analysis; the bright line test cannot replace examination of the assessee&#039;s AMP functions against suitable comparables, so the adjustment was remanded for fresh determination. The claim for advances written off as irrecoverable special additional duty on obsolete goods was disallowed because the goods remained closing stock and the amount continued to form part of purchase cost, so the disallowance was sustained. The warranty provision claim was not examined on the existing record and required factual verification based on past experience and rational estimation, so it was restored for fresh adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2015 10:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=386073" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 821 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259947</link>
      <description>AMP transfer pricing requires a comparability-based arm&#039;s length analysis; the bright line test cannot replace examination of the assessee&#039;s AMP functions against suitable comparables, so the adjustment was remanded for fresh determination. The claim for advances written off as irrecoverable special additional duty on obsolete goods was disallowed because the goods remained closing stock and the amount continued to form part of purchase cost, so the disallowance was sustained. The warranty provision claim was not examined on the existing record and required factual verification based on past experience and rational estimation, so it was restored for fresh adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259947</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>