<?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 (8) TMI 543 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756839</link>
    <description>ITAT Hyderabad ruled on transfer pricing adjustments regarding comparable company selection for software development services. The tribunal directed inclusion of Evoke Technologies Ltd, finding its functional analysis similar to the appellant&#039;s software development services. The tribunal also ordered inclusion of Akshay Software Technologies Ltd, Mindtree Ltd, and R.S. Software India Ltd, holding that DRP erred in suo moto applying onsite revenue filters without establishing higher costs. However, the tribunal directed exclusion of Persistent Systems Ltd and Sasken Communication Technologies Ltd, finding them not comparable as they were predominantly product companies rather than software development service providers operating on cost-plus markup basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2024 10:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=763642" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 543 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756839</link>
      <description>ITAT Hyderabad ruled on transfer pricing adjustments regarding comparable company selection for software development services. The tribunal directed inclusion of Evoke Technologies Ltd, finding its functional analysis similar to the appellant&#039;s software development services. The tribunal also ordered inclusion of Akshay Software Technologies Ltd, Mindtree Ltd, and R.S. Software India Ltd, holding that DRP erred in suo moto applying onsite revenue filters without establishing higher costs. However, the tribunal directed exclusion of Persistent Systems Ltd and Sasken Communication Technologies Ltd, finding them not comparable as they were predominantly product companies rather than software development service providers operating on cost-plus markup basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756839</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>