<?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>2022 (12) TMI 526 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431409</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals for A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2014-15 for statistical purposes, setting aside issues related to the appellant&#039;s functional profile and arm&#039;s length price for further examination by the TPO. The TPO was directed to reassess the functions performed, costs incurred, and services provided by the appellant to determine the arm&#039;s length price in compliance with the law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2022 08:25:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=698409" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (12) TMI 526 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431409</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals for A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2014-15 for statistical purposes, setting aside issues related to the appellant&#039;s functional profile and arm&#039;s length price for further examination by the TPO. The TPO was directed to reassess the functions performed, costs incurred, and services provided by the appellant to determine the arm&#039;s length price in compliance with the law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431409</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>