https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282455 Prior-period expenditure was treated as deductible in the year tax was deducted and deposited under the proviso to section 40(a)(ia), even though the expense had not been claimed in the year of accrual; the disallowance was therefore deleted. For transfer pricing, interest on an INR-denominated external commercial borrowing had to be benchmarked against the Indian Prime Lending Rate because the relevant comparable is the market rate for the currency of repayment; LIBOR was rejected as the proper benchmark, so the adjustment was deleted. The commentary states that both substantive additions failed and the assessee obtained complete relief. en-us Fri, 10 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Aug 2019 21:17:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282455 Prior-period expenditure was treated as deductible in the year tax was deducted and deposited under the proviso to section 40(a)(ia), even though the expense had not been claimed in the year of accrual; the disallowance was therefore deleted. For transfer pricing, interest on an INR-denominated external commercial borrowing had to be benchmarked against the Indian Prime Lending Rate because the relevant comparable is the market rate for the currency of repayment; LIBOR was rejected as the proper benchmark, so the adjustment was deleted. The commentary states that both substantive additions failed and the assessee obtained complete relief. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282455