<?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 (2) TMI 261 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271556</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal partly, directing the Transfer Pricing Officer to analyze the UK comparables chosen by the assessee for benchmarking international transactions. The decision emphasized the significance of considering the economic environment of the Permanent Establishment&#039;s location for Transfer Pricing purposes, supporting the use of UK comparables over Indian comparables due to the PE&#039;s costs being influenced by UK economic factors.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2016 10:23:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=415854" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 261 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271556</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal partly, directing the Transfer Pricing Officer to analyze the UK comparables chosen by the assessee for benchmarking international transactions. The decision emphasized the significance of considering the economic environment of the Permanent Establishment&#039;s location for Transfer Pricing purposes, supporting the use of UK comparables over Indian comparables due to the PE&#039;s costs being influenced by UK economic factors.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271556</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>