<?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>2018 (4) TMI 573 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358462</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the inclusion of three comparables in the Arms Length Price determination for companies manufacturing and selling medical and diagnostic equipment, emphasizing their functional similarities. Despite objections from the Revenue, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal supported the inclusion based on factual findings, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2018 07:40:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=516688" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 573 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358462</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the inclusion of three comparables in the Arms Length Price determination for companies manufacturing and selling medical and diagnostic equipment, emphasizing their functional similarities. Despite objections from the Revenue, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal supported the inclusion based on factual findings, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358462</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>