<?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 (8) TMI 79 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330695</link>
    <description>Recruitment and training expenses, quality audit expenses, and software acquisition costs were treated as revenue outgoings because they supported recurring business operations and did not create an enduring capital asset; the software payment was also not characterised as royalty or fee for technical services. Retention bonus paid to employees was allowed as a deductible business expense in the year of payment, being a salary-linked incentive to retain staff and maintain operations. In transfer pricing, certain comparables and working capital adjustment required fresh verification, so the matter was restored for reconsideration with an opportunity of hearing. The assessee&#039;s grievance on natural justice was accepted, and the DRP&#039;s directions were held binding on the TPO.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2016 18:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=437148" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 79 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330695</link>
      <description>Recruitment and training expenses, quality audit expenses, and software acquisition costs were treated as revenue outgoings because they supported recurring business operations and did not create an enduring capital asset; the software payment was also not characterised as royalty or fee for technical services. Retention bonus paid to employees was allowed as a deductible business expense in the year of payment, being a salary-linked incentive to retain staff and maintain operations. In transfer pricing, certain comparables and working capital adjustment required fresh verification, so the matter was restored for reconsideration with an opportunity of hearing. The assessee&#039;s grievance on natural justice was accepted, and the DRP&#039;s directions were held binding on the TPO.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330695</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>