<?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>2019 (7) TMI 1146 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383450</link>
    <description>Once the arm&#039;s length price procedure is satisfied, no further profit attribution arises merely because the taxpayer has a permanent establishment in India. The review petitions challenged reassessment notices founded only on the existence of a permanent establishment, without showing any separate or additional attribution of profit beyond the arm&#039;s length compliance. The SC found no error apparent on the face of the record and declined reconsideration of the impugned order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2026 11:14:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=580704" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 1146 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383450</link>
      <description>Once the arm&#039;s length price procedure is satisfied, no further profit attribution arises merely because the taxpayer has a permanent establishment in India. The review petitions challenged reassessment notices founded only on the existence of a permanent establishment, without showing any separate or additional attribution of profit beyond the arm&#039;s length compliance. The SC found no error apparent on the face of the record and declined reconsideration of the impugned order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383450</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>