<?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 (9) TMI 1342 - ITAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287090</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal in a transfer pricing case. The Tribunal emphasized the requirement for the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to adhere to prescribed methods for determining the Arm&#039;s Length Price (ALP) and rejected arbitrary estimations. The TPO&#039;s adjustment of the ALP for technical know-how fees and markup on recovery of expenses were overturned by the Tribunal, citing the necessity for proper documentation and adherence to pass-through transaction principles. The inclusion/exclusion of comparables issue became irrelevant, and a minor disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) was dismissed due to the assessee not pursuing it during the hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2020 10:05:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=608339" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 1342 - ITAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287090</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal in a transfer pricing case. The Tribunal emphasized the requirement for the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to adhere to prescribed methods for determining the Arm&#039;s Length Price (ALP) and rejected arbitrary estimations. The TPO&#039;s adjustment of the ALP for technical know-how fees and markup on recovery of expenses were overturned by the Tribunal, citing the necessity for proper documentation and adherence to pass-through transaction principles. The inclusion/exclusion of comparables issue became irrelevant, and a minor disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) was dismissed due to the assessee not pursuing it during the hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287090</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>