<?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 (6) TMI 677 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260752</link>
    <description>The appeal by the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, with various issues remanded to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal stressed the significance of functional comparability and accurate benchmarking in transfer pricing analysis, highlighting errors in the approach taken by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) and Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) in the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2015 07:30:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=388201" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (6) TMI 677 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260752</link>
      <description>The appeal by the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, with various issues remanded to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal stressed the significance of functional comparability and accurate benchmarking in transfer pricing analysis, highlighting errors in the approach taken by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) and Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) in the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260752</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>