<?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 1001 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177140</link>
    <description>Transfer pricing comparability in software development service cases was addressed by applying a turnover filter, related party transactions filter and functional comparability tests. Companies with turnover exceeding Rs. 200 crores were treated as unreliable comparables against a much smaller taxpayer and excluded. The Tribunal also held that related party transactions do not automatically disqualify a comparable, but a 15% threshold applies; companies above that level were excluded, while those below it could be retained. Functionally different companies, and high profits without extraordinary circumstances, did not justify exclusion. The 5% range under section 92C(2) was held to be a tolerance band only, not a standard deduction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2016 12:58:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=411796" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 1001 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177140</link>
      <description>Transfer pricing comparability in software development service cases was addressed by applying a turnover filter, related party transactions filter and functional comparability tests. Companies with turnover exceeding Rs. 200 crores were treated as unreliable comparables against a much smaller taxpayer and excluded. The Tribunal also held that related party transactions do not automatically disqualify a comparable, but a 15% threshold applies; companies above that level were excluded, while those below it could be retained. Functionally different companies, and high profits without extraordinary circumstances, did not justify exclusion. The 5% range under section 92C(2) was held to be a tolerance band only, not a standard deduction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177140</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>