<?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 1438 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284456</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, directing the TPO/AO to exclude certain comparables based on functional dissimilarity, correct margin computation for specific comparables, reconsider inclusion of comparables erroneously rejected by the TPO, and consider the basis for risk adjustment provided by the assessee. The Tribunal emphasized the need for fresh adjudication, ensuring the assessee was given an opportunity to present its case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2019 10:03:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=594712" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 1438 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284456</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, directing the TPO/AO to exclude certain comparables based on functional dissimilarity, correct margin computation for specific comparables, reconsider inclusion of comparables erroneously rejected by the TPO, and consider the basis for risk adjustment provided by the assessee. The Tribunal emphasized the need for fresh adjudication, ensuring the assessee was given an opportunity to present its case.</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=284456</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>