https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756339 TP adjustment on alleged international transaction of AMP expenditure was held unsustainable because the Revenue failed to adduce any evidence of an explicit or implicit arrangement obliging the assessee to incur AMP for the foreign parent, or that the AMP budget was parent-driven; the AMP adjustment was deleted. In Trading and Networking segments, functionally dissimilar comparables were directed to be deselected; the TP analysis was to be recomputed accordingly. For Trading, Networking and Manufacturing segments, working capital adjustment and rectification of comparable margins were directed as the TPO omitted them; recomputation was ordered with only operational items included. Proportionate adjustment was directed to be recomputed restricting to AE transactions. Royalty adjustment under CUP was deleted as the selected comparables lacked meaningful transactional comparability and cherry-picking caused impermissible double adjustment vis-à-vis TNMM. Salary to secondees was allowed under s.37 as they worked under the assessee's control and for its business, with no contrary evidence. en-us Mon, 29 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Dec 2025 17:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756339 TP adjustment on alleged international transaction of AMP expenditure was held unsustainable because the Revenue failed to adduce any evidence of an explicit or implicit arrangement obliging the assessee to incur AMP for the foreign parent, or that the AMP budget was parent-driven; the AMP adjustment was deleted. In Trading and Networking segments, functionally dissimilar comparables were directed to be deselected; the TP analysis was to be recomputed accordingly. For Trading, Networking and Manufacturing segments, working capital adjustment and rectification of comparable margins were directed as the TPO omitted them; recomputation was ordered with only operational items included. Proportionate adjustment was directed to be recomputed restricting to AE transactions. Royalty adjustment under CUP was deleted as the selected comparables lacked meaningful transactional comparability and cherry-picking caused impermissible double adjustment vis-à-vis TNMM. Salary to secondees was allowed under s.37 as they worked under the assessee's control and for its business, with no contrary evidence. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 29 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756339