https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192211 Transfer pricing comparability for a captive low-risk ITES provider was refined by excluding functionally dissimilar entities engaged in higher-end KPO work, or marked by scale, brand, intangibles, or mixed service profiles. The authority also held that a comparable should not be rejected merely because of an asserted lack of annual report or a different financial year if audited data can be reliably derived, and those comparables required fresh verification. Alleged margin computation errors, risk adjustment claims, and the treatment of receivables from an associated enterprise were restored for factual examination and recomputation. en-us Fri, 29 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 May 2017 08:59:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192211 Transfer pricing comparability for a captive low-risk ITES provider was refined by excluding functionally dissimilar entities engaged in higher-end KPO work, or marked by scale, brand, intangibles, or mixed service profiles. The authority also held that a comparable should not be rejected merely because of an asserted lack of annual report or a different financial year if audited data can be reliably derived, and those comparables required fresh verification. Alleged margin computation errors, risk adjustment claims, and the treatment of receivables from an associated enterprise were restored for factual examination and recomputation. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 29 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192211