<?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>2020 (6) TMI 838 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459143</link>
    <description>Appeal was dismissed for low tax effect under CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, leaving the transfer pricing issues and the determination of arm&#039;s length price open. The High Court framed substantial questions of law on those issues but did not decide them on merits because the tax-effect threshold was not met. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to seek restoration if the tax effect later exceeds the circular threshold.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2024 19:08:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=780335" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (6) TMI 838 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459143</link>
      <description>Appeal was dismissed for low tax effect under CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, leaving the transfer pricing issues and the determination of arm&#039;s length price open. The High Court framed substantial questions of law on those issues but did not decide them on merits because the tax-effect threshold was not met. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to seek restoration if the tax effect later exceeds the circular threshold.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459143</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>