https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184380 The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, allowing the assessee's deduction u/s 10B for income earned through associated enterprises under sub-contract. The tribunal found that the assessee retained control and ownership of intellectual property rights, bore risks, and ensured compliance with customer requirements, making the income eligible for the deduction. Emphasizing the arm's length pricing and supervision by the assessee, the tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross-objection, affirming the CIT(A)'s order. The decision was pronounced on July 31, 2015, aligning with previous case law and highlighting key ownership and control elements for tax deduction eligibility. en-us Fri, 31 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Jul 2016 11:28:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184380 The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, allowing the assessee's deduction u/s 10B for income earned through associated enterprises under sub-contract. The tribunal found that the assessee retained control and ownership of intellectual property rights, bore risks, and ensured compliance with customer requirements, making the income eligible for the deduction. Emphasizing the arm's length pricing and supervision by the assessee, the tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross-objection, affirming the CIT(A)'s order. The decision was pronounced on July 31, 2015, aligning with previous case law and highlighting key ownership and control elements for tax deduction eligibility. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 31 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184380