https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283579 The HC upheld the ITAT's decisions on all three issues, affirming that Maple eSolutions Limited was a valid comparable despite past fraud allegations, Genesys International Corporation Limited was rightly excluded due to high RPT percentage, and Mercury Outsourcing Management Limited was excluded based on turnover criteria. The HC dismissed the appeal, citing no substantial questions of law, and emphasized that dissatisfaction with factual findings does not justify invoking Section 260A of the IT Act. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs. en-us Tue, 14 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jul 2026 16:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283579 The HC upheld the ITAT's decisions on all three issues, affirming that Maple eSolutions Limited was a valid comparable despite past fraud allegations, Genesys International Corporation Limited was rightly excluded due to high RPT percentage, and Mercury Outsourcing Management Limited was excluded based on turnover criteria. The HC dismissed the appeal, citing no substantial questions of law, and emphasized that dissatisfaction with factual findings does not justify invoking Section 260A of the IT Act. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 14 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283579