<?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 (10) TMI 1035 - Delhi High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191816</link>
    <description>The High Court of Delhi dismissed the appeal as no substantial questions of law arose from excluding comparables M/s Infosys Ltd. and M/s. Persistent Systems Ltd., and from the treatment of foreign exchange gain or loss in transfer pricing determination of ALP. The court&#039;s decision was based on the significant differences in activities and intangibles ownership, as well as the inappropriate reliance on a Safe Harbour Notification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2017 08:15:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=466752" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 1035 - Delhi High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191816</link>
      <description>The High Court of Delhi dismissed the appeal as no substantial questions of law arose from excluding comparables M/s Infosys Ltd. and M/s. Persistent Systems Ltd., and from the treatment of foreign exchange gain or loss in transfer pricing determination of ALP. The court&#039;s decision was based on the significant differences in activities and intangibles ownership, as well as the inappropriate reliance on a Safe Harbour Notification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191816</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>