<?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 (9) TMI 1369 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759125</link>
    <description>Functional comparability on FAR analysis supported retention of E-Infochips Bangalore Limited, Kals Information Systems Limited, Persistent Systems Limited and Mindtree Limited in the transfer pricing set. Delayed trade receivables were also subjected to a notional interest adjustment, but only at the DRP&#039;s restricted benchmark of LIBOR plus 250 basis points, which was not disturbed in the assessee&#039;s appeal. The article further notes that the Hyderabad unit loss set-off against Pune STPI unit profit, and the related section 10A relief claim, were not entertained because the issue had not been raised before the DRP and was treated as procedurally and substantively unsustainable at that stage.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2024 18:16:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=770288" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 1369 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759125</link>
      <description>Functional comparability on FAR analysis supported retention of E-Infochips Bangalore Limited, Kals Information Systems Limited, Persistent Systems Limited and Mindtree Limited in the transfer pricing set. Delayed trade receivables were also subjected to a notional interest adjustment, but only at the DRP&#039;s restricted benchmark of LIBOR plus 250 basis points, which was not disturbed in the assessee&#039;s appeal. The article further notes that the Hyderabad unit loss set-off against Pune STPI unit profit, and the related section 10A relief claim, were not entertained because the issue had not been raised before the DRP and was treated as procedurally and substantively unsustainable at that stage.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759125</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>