<?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 1238 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193408</link>
    <description>Transfer pricing comparability turns on functional similarity, not profit or loss alone. A routine, low-risk service provider&#039;s market support functions were held comparable with Capital Trusts Ltd. and Agrima Consultants International Ltd. because their relevant consultancy and feasibility-report activities were functionally similar, while loss-making status did not by itself justify exclusion. IDC (India) Ltd. was treated as a high-end KPO provider and excluded, and Empire Industries Ltd. was excluded because its principal income came from manufacturing, trading and indenting rather than support services. The set-off claim for brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation was not finally decided and was remitted for verification in line with prior directions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:30:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=483339" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 1238 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193408</link>
      <description>Transfer pricing comparability turns on functional similarity, not profit or loss alone. A routine, low-risk service provider&#039;s market support functions were held comparable with Capital Trusts Ltd. and Agrima Consultants International Ltd. because their relevant consultancy and feasibility-report activities were functionally similar, while loss-making status did not by itself justify exclusion. IDC (India) Ltd. was treated as a high-end KPO provider and excluded, and Empire Industries Ltd. was excluded because its principal income came from manufacturing, trading and indenting rather than support services. The set-off claim for brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation was not finally decided and was remitted for verification in line with prior directions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193408</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>