https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342332 The Tribunal reiterated that CUP was the appropriate benchmarking method for the assessee's medical transcription services, relying on its earlier year view and finding no material factual distinction to justify reopening that issue. It declined the Revenue's attempt to re-argue the same factual appreciation, and directed a fresh ALP computation after giving the assessee due opportunity. TNMM was retained only for the separate software development/ITES segment, in line with the earlier-year reasoning. en-us Fri, 28 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 May 2017 09:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342332 The Tribunal reiterated that CUP was the appropriate benchmarking method for the assessee's medical transcription services, relying on its earlier year view and finding no material factual distinction to justify reopening that issue. It declined the Revenue's attempt to re-argue the same factual appreciation, and directed a fresh ALP computation after giving the assessee due opportunity. TNMM was retained only for the separate software development/ITES segment, in line with the earlier-year reasoning. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342332