<?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 (11) TMI 190 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445299</link>
    <description>The ITAT Hyderabad upheld the TPO&#039;s decision to charge 6% interest on receivables outstanding beyond 30 days, finding the assessee failed to provide adequate supporting evidence like ledgers and confirmations despite submitting invoices and calculations. The tribunal rejected the assessee&#039;s argument that deferred receivables don&#039;t constitute separate international transactions requiring benchmarking. However, regarding section 10AA deduction, the tribunal directed the AO to delete the disallowance, noting that CPC had already allowed the deduction through rectification and the AO had not disputed this in the draft assessment order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Nov 2023 09:16:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=731258" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (11) TMI 190 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445299</link>
      <description>The ITAT Hyderabad upheld the TPO&#039;s decision to charge 6% interest on receivables outstanding beyond 30 days, finding the assessee failed to provide adequate supporting evidence like ledgers and confirmations despite submitting invoices and calculations. The tribunal rejected the assessee&#039;s argument that deferred receivables don&#039;t constitute separate international transactions requiring benchmarking. However, regarding section 10AA deduction, the tribunal directed the AO to delete the disallowance, noting that CPC had already allowed the deduction through rectification and the AO had not disputed this in the draft assessment order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445299</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>