<?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>No Penalty for Using Multiple Year Data in ALP Due to Debatable Issue: Section 271(1)(c) Interpretation.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=48548</link>
    <description>Penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) - adoption of multiple year data OR single year data for determining ALP - the fact remains that the legislature thought it necessary to clarify that the data that was required to be used had to necessarily relate to the financial year in question and not to multiple year data - during the AY in question, the issue was debatable - no penalty</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2019 07:22:26 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2019 07:22:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=583083" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>No Penalty for Using Multiple Year Data in ALP Due to Debatable Issue: Section 271(1)(c) Interpretation.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=48548</link>
      <description>Penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) - adoption of multiple year data OR single year data for determining ALP - the fact remains that the legislature thought it necessary to clarify that the data that was required to be used had to necessarily relate to the financial year in question and not to multiple year data - during the AY in question, the issue was debatable - no penalty</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2019 07:22:26 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=48548</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>