<?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 (8) TMI 960 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263043</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, directing the inclusion of EDCIL (India) Ltd. and ICRA Management Consulting Services Ltd. as comparables for determining the arm&#039;s length price (ALP) and excluding three rejected companies. The Assessing Officer was directed to grant credit for the advance tax paid by the assessee after verification. The Transfer Pricing Officer was to recalculate the final arithmetic mean for the selected comparables to determine the ALP.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2015 10:11:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=394731" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 960 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263043</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, directing the inclusion of EDCIL (India) Ltd. and ICRA Management Consulting Services Ltd. as comparables for determining the arm&#039;s length price (ALP) and excluding three rejected companies. The Assessing Officer was directed to grant credit for the advance tax paid by the assessee after verification. The Transfer Pricing Officer was to recalculate the final arithmetic mean for the selected comparables to determine the ALP.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263043</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>