<?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 (4) TMI 1511 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290476</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, directing the AO to re-examine issues such as working capital adjustments and the inclusion of certain comparables, while upholding the DRP&#039;s decisions on other matters. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of functional similarity and sufficient evidence in determining company comparability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Nov 2024 11:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=623516" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 1511 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290476</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, directing the AO to re-examine issues such as working capital adjustments and the inclusion of certain comparables, while upholding the DRP&#039;s decisions on other matters. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of functional similarity and sufficient evidence in determining company comparability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290476</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>