<?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>2016 (1) TMI 582 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270790</link>
    <description>A complete change in beneficial ownership of voting power can trigger the bar on carry forward and set-off of business losses under section 79, and common ultimate holding-company ownership does not by itself preserve the loss claim absent an arrangement showing continued beneficial ownership. The AMP transfer pricing issue must be examined on facts after Sony Ericsson: the Bright Line Test cannot by itself establish an international transaction, and an arm&#039;s length price adjustment arises only if such a transaction is first proved. The loss set-off claim failed, while the AMP issue was remanded for fresh consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 May 2016 11:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=413197" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 582 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270790</link>
      <description>A complete change in beneficial ownership of voting power can trigger the bar on carry forward and set-off of business losses under section 79, and common ultimate holding-company ownership does not by itself preserve the loss claim absent an arrangement showing continued beneficial ownership. The AMP transfer pricing issue must be examined on facts after Sony Ericsson: the Bright Line Test cannot by itself establish an international transaction, and an arm&#039;s length price adjustment arises only if such a transaction is first proved. The loss set-off claim failed, while the AMP issue was remanded for fresh consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270790</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>