<?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>Telecom Company Wins Appeal: Section 263 Revision Order Invalid for License Fee, Demerger, and Transfer Pricing Issues</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86072</link>
    <description>ITAT overturned PCIT&#039;s revision order under s.263 concerning multiple issues in a telecom company&#039;s assessment. Key rulings: Interest/penalty on delayed license fee payments held as revenue expenditure, being compensatory rather than capital in nature. Carry forward of accumulated losses under s.72A allowed as demerger conditions were satisfied. No s.56(2)(x) implications arose on business acquisition through court-approved demerger. Transfer pricing adjustment directive rejected as AO had followed jurisdictional High Court precedent. Claims regarding TDS on bandwidth charges to non-residents, s.14A disallowance, depreciation verification, and s.269SS compliance were found to have been adequately examined during original assessment. ITAT emphasized that PCIT&#039;s revision powers cannot be exercised where AO has conducted proper inquiry, even if conclusions differ.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Feb 2025 08:14:47 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Feb 2025 08:14:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=802208" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Telecom Company Wins Appeal: Section 263 Revision Order Invalid for License Fee, Demerger, and Transfer Pricing Issues</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86072</link>
      <description>ITAT overturned PCIT&#039;s revision order under s.263 concerning multiple issues in a telecom company&#039;s assessment. Key rulings: Interest/penalty on delayed license fee payments held as revenue expenditure, being compensatory rather than capital in nature. Carry forward of accumulated losses under s.72A allowed as demerger conditions were satisfied. No s.56(2)(x) implications arose on business acquisition through court-approved demerger. Transfer pricing adjustment directive rejected as AO had followed jurisdictional High Court precedent. Claims regarding TDS on bandwidth charges to non-residents, s.14A disallowance, depreciation verification, and s.269SS compliance were found to have been adequately examined during original assessment. ITAT emphasized that PCIT&#039;s revision powers cannot be exercised where AO has conducted proper inquiry, even if conclusions differ.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Feb 2025 08:14:47 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86072</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>