<?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 (1) TMI 1351 - ITAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274439</link>
    <description>In determining arm&#039;s length price for international transactions in the software R&amp;D services and IT back-office support services segments, the ITAT held that selection of comparables must reflect functional similarity and appropriate filters; it therefore directed exclusion/inclusion of specific comparables as warranted, resulting in partial allowance of the transfer pricing grounds for statistical purposes. On exemption under s.10A, the ITAT found the allocation of directors&#039; remuneration between the eligible STP unit and the non-eligible unit required proper verification on facts and consistent allocation principles; it remanded the issue to the AO for fresh examination, leaving the s.10A claim open to recomputation accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2025 10:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=530757" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 1351 - ITAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274439</link>
      <description>In determining arm&#039;s length price for international transactions in the software R&amp;D services and IT back-office support services segments, the ITAT held that selection of comparables must reflect functional similarity and appropriate filters; it therefore directed exclusion/inclusion of specific comparables as warranted, resulting in partial allowance of the transfer pricing grounds for statistical purposes. On exemption under s.10A, the ITAT found the allocation of directors&#039; remuneration between the eligible STP unit and the non-eligible unit required proper verification on facts and consistent allocation principles; it remanded the issue to the AO for fresh examination, leaving the s.10A claim open to recomputation accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274439</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>