<?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 808 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440535</link>
    <description>The HC concluded that the appellant/revenue&#039;s appeals were closed due to the absence of a substantial question of law. The appellant failed to challenge the Tribunal&#039;s prior order, which endorsed the TNMM and Berry ratio for determining the ALP of international transactions. The issues in the current appeals mirrored those from previous years, negating the need for further consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 May 2024 12:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=720080" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (7) TMI 808 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440535</link>
      <description>The HC concluded that the appellant/revenue&#039;s appeals were closed due to the absence of a substantial question of law. The appellant failed to challenge the Tribunal&#039;s prior order, which endorsed the TNMM and Berry ratio for determining the ALP of international transactions. The issues in the current appeals mirrored those from previous years, negating the need for further consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440535</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>