<?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 (9) TMI 1320 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367584</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision to exclude Media Research Users Council (MRUC) from comparables for transfer pricing adjustment. The Tribunal reasoned that MRUC&#039;s not-for-profit status, operational model, revenue sources, and profit distribution differed significantly from profit-making entities, making it unsuitable for comparison. Despite Revenue&#039;s arguments on profit margins, the Court supported the exclusion based on various dissimilarities, including the absence of quid pro quo in income generation and extensive outsourcing. The judgment highlights the significance of functional similarity and profit motive in transfer pricing analysis, affirming the Tribunal&#039;s exclusion of MRUC.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Sep 2018 17:11:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=535496" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 1320 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367584</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision to exclude Media Research Users Council (MRUC) from comparables for transfer pricing adjustment. The Tribunal reasoned that MRUC&#039;s not-for-profit status, operational model, revenue sources, and profit distribution differed significantly from profit-making entities, making it unsuitable for comparison. Despite Revenue&#039;s arguments on profit margins, the Court supported the exclusion based on various dissimilarities, including the absence of quid pro quo in income generation and extensive outsourcing. The judgment highlights the significance of functional similarity and profit motive in transfer pricing analysis, affirming the Tribunal&#039;s exclusion of MRUC.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367584</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>