https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262737 The Tribunal set aside the Transfer Pricing Officer's adjustments for AY 2008-09 and AY 2009-10, ruling that the Comparable Uncontrolled Price method was not applicable due to the terminated agreement. The Tribunal directed reconsideration of the entire service transaction for determining the arm's length price. For AY 2009-10, the Tribunal allowed 60% depreciation on computer hardware and software, following relevant judicial precedents. It dismissed the proportionate disallowance of depreciation based on the number of employees and directed verification of interest computation under section 234D. en-us Wed, 14 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Aug 2015 17:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262737 The Tribunal set aside the Transfer Pricing Officer's adjustments for AY 2008-09 and AY 2009-10, ruling that the Comparable Uncontrolled Price method was not applicable due to the terminated agreement. The Tribunal directed reconsideration of the entire service transaction for determining the arm's length price. For AY 2009-10, the Tribunal allowed 60% depreciation on computer hardware and software, following relevant judicial precedents. It dismissed the proportionate disallowance of depreciation based on the number of employees and directed verification of interest computation under section 234D. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 14 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262737