<?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>2018 (4) TMI 1840 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291841</link>
    <description>A comparable may be excluded in transfer pricing analysis where abnormal profitability is driven by extraordinary factors such as restructuring, strong brand presence, and materially different turnover, because those features can distort reliability on a market basis. On that basis, the Tribunal&#039;s exclusion of Wipro Technology Services Limited as a comparable for arm&#039;s length price determination was upheld, and no substantial question of law arose.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:18:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=628633" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 1840 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291841</link>
      <description>A comparable may be excluded in transfer pricing analysis where abnormal profitability is driven by extraordinary factors such as restructuring, strong brand presence, and materially different turnover, because those features can distort reliability on a market basis. On that basis, the Tribunal&#039;s exclusion of Wipro Technology Services Limited as a comparable for arm&#039;s length price determination was upheld, and no substantial question of law arose.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291841</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>