<?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>2023 (7) TMI 125 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439852</link>
    <description>A captive software development service provider was compared under transfer pricing principles by testing functional similarity, segmental reliability, onsite operations, brand value, intangibles, R&amp;D intensity and related party transactions. Mind Tree, L&amp;T Infotech, Infobeans, Persistent Systems and Infosys were excluded because their profiles were materially different or comparability data was unreliable. I2T2 India and Infomile Technologies were directed to be included because non-disclosure of related party transaction details alone was not enough to reject otherwise functionally comparable companies. Working capital adjustment was accepted in principle and remanded for fresh computation on actual basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 May 2026 17:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=718472" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (7) TMI 125 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439852</link>
      <description>A captive software development service provider was compared under transfer pricing principles by testing functional similarity, segmental reliability, onsite operations, brand value, intangibles, R&amp;D intensity and related party transactions. Mind Tree, L&amp;T Infotech, Infobeans, Persistent Systems and Infosys were excluded because their profiles were materially different or comparability data was unreliable. I2T2 India and Infomile Technologies were directed to be included because non-disclosure of related party transaction details alone was not enough to reject otherwise functionally comparable companies. Working capital adjustment was accepted in principle and remanded for fresh computation on actual basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439852</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>