<?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 (7) TMI 128 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754908</link>
    <description>ITAT Mumbai dismissed Revenue&#039;s appeal regarding transfer pricing adjustments for software services provider. The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)&#039;s comparable selection for TNMM benchmarking of software and consultancy services to associated enterprises, finding no merit in Revenue&#039;s challenge to detailed comparability analysis. For guarantee provisions, rates were modified: performance guarantee at 0.88%, finance guarantee at 0.77%, and lease guarantee at 0.88% with 60% restriction. Inter-company loans issue was remanded for proper examination of quasi-equity nature and shareholder activity claims. Brand royalty adjustment was rejected as assessee was not the trademark owner, confirming no royalty obligation to associated enterprises.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Jul 2024 14:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=758563" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 128 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754908</link>
      <description>ITAT Mumbai dismissed Revenue&#039;s appeal regarding transfer pricing adjustments for software services provider. The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)&#039;s comparable selection for TNMM benchmarking of software and consultancy services to associated enterprises, finding no merit in Revenue&#039;s challenge to detailed comparability analysis. For guarantee provisions, rates were modified: performance guarantee at 0.88%, finance guarantee at 0.77%, and lease guarantee at 0.88% with 60% restriction. Inter-company loans issue was remanded for proper examination of quasi-equity nature and shareholder activity claims. Brand royalty adjustment was rejected as assessee was not the trademark owner, confirming no royalty obligation to associated enterprises.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754908</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>