<?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 1165 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191009</link>
    <description>The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, with directions for the Transfer Pricing Officer to reconsider certain comparables and the allowability of deduction under section 10A. The tribunal emphasized the need for transparency and justification in the selection of comparables and filters used in transfer pricing analysis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2022 12:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=461407" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 1165 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191009</link>
      <description>The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, with directions for the Transfer Pricing Officer to reconsider certain comparables and the allowability of deduction under section 10A. The tribunal emphasized the need for transparency and justification in the selection of comparables and filters used in transfer pricing analysis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191009</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>