<?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>2017 (2) TMI 1415 - ITAT INDORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280209</link>
    <description>Closely linked long-term project transactions may be benchmarked on an aggregated basis where project-wise comparison distorts margins, so the transfer pricing adjustment on contract revenue was deleted. Separate technical service payments under collaboration agreements were not covered by royalty clauses, so an arm&#039;s length price of nil was unsustainable and the adjustment was deleted. Technical drawings and designs purchased as copyrighted articles on a principal-to-principal basis did not amount to royalty or trigger tax deduction at source, so the disallowance was removed. A warranty provision supported by past experience and consistent accounting practice was treated as an ascertained liability and allowed as a deduction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2019 06:32:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=568322" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 1415 - ITAT INDORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280209</link>
      <description>Closely linked long-term project transactions may be benchmarked on an aggregated basis where project-wise comparison distorts margins, so the transfer pricing adjustment on contract revenue was deleted. Separate technical service payments under collaboration agreements were not covered by royalty clauses, so an arm&#039;s length price of nil was unsustainable and the adjustment was deleted. Technical drawings and designs purchased as copyrighted articles on a principal-to-principal basis did not amount to royalty or trigger tax deduction at source, so the disallowance was removed. A warranty provision supported by past experience and consistent accounting practice was treated as an ascertained liability and allowed as a deduction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280209</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>