<?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>2024 (4) TMI 132 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750951</link>
    <description>Transfer pricing benchmarking for engineering and technical services required examination of the AE segment and segmental margin material, rather than entity-wide figures alone, so the matter was remanded for fresh verification. Reimbursement of expatriates&#039; salary, bonus and provident fund costs also called for documentary scrutiny, including the deputation agreement and supporting records, and was sent back for reconsideration. Miscellaneous expenditure and provision for project loss were similarly restored for factual and legal verification, including invoice-based year attribution and the accounting treatment for construction contracts and ICDS. The disputed additions were therefore not decided on merits and were remitted for fresh adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 May 2026 16:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=749039" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (4) TMI 132 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750951</link>
      <description>Transfer pricing benchmarking for engineering and technical services required examination of the AE segment and segmental margin material, rather than entity-wide figures alone, so the matter was remanded for fresh verification. Reimbursement of expatriates&#039; salary, bonus and provident fund costs also called for documentary scrutiny, including the deputation agreement and supporting records, and was sent back for reconsideration. Miscellaneous expenditure and provision for project loss were similarly restored for factual and legal verification, including invoice-based year attribution and the accounting treatment for construction contracts and ICDS. The disputed additions were therefore not decided on merits and were remitted for fresh adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750951</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>