<?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>Power Transfer Pricing u/s 80IA: High Court Validates CUP Method Using State Electricity Board Rates as ALP Benchmark.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85145</link>
    <description>HC held that Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method was appropriate for determining Arm&#039;s Length Price (ALP) for power transfer between eligible and non-eligible units u/s 80IA. The court affirmed that Rs. 4.39 per kWh, being the rate at which assessee supplied excess power to UPPCL, constituted a valid internal uncontrolled transaction and was correctly accepted as ALP. Following precedent from Jindal Steel case, HC confirmed that State Electricity Board rates for industrial consumers represent market value u/s 80IA(8). The regulated nature of electricity market necessitates comparable transactions to be materially similar without price-affecting differences. Matter resolved in assessee&#039;s favor, validating their ALP computation methodology and transfer pricing adjustments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2025 08:44:40 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2025 08:44:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=791566" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Power Transfer Pricing u/s 80IA: High Court Validates CUP Method Using State Electricity Board Rates as ALP Benchmark.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85145</link>
      <description>HC held that Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method was appropriate for determining Arm&#039;s Length Price (ALP) for power transfer between eligible and non-eligible units u/s 80IA. The court affirmed that Rs. 4.39 per kWh, being the rate at which assessee supplied excess power to UPPCL, constituted a valid internal uncontrolled transaction and was correctly accepted as ALP. Following precedent from Jindal Steel case, HC confirmed that State Electricity Board rates for industrial consumers represent market value u/s 80IA(8). The regulated nature of electricity market necessitates comparable transactions to be materially similar without price-affecting differences. Matter resolved in assessee&#039;s favor, validating their ALP computation methodology and transfer pricing adjustments.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2025 08:44:40 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85145</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>