<?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>Tax Tribunal Allows Assessee&#039;s Appeal on Intra-Group Services, Fixed Asset Mark-ups, and Royalty Payments Under Transfer Pricing Rules</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86956</link>
    <description>ITAT dismissed grounds 1 and 2 regarding validity of assessment order, relying on Aztec Software precedent. The Tribunal allowed ground 3 concerning Intra Group Services, following a coordinate Bench decision in assessee&#039;s own case for AY 2010-11, as Revenue failed to demonstrate distinguishing features in the current assessment year. Similarly, ground 4 regarding disallowance of mark-up charged by AEs on fixed asset purchases was allowed, directing deletion of the ALP adjustment. Regarding royalty payments, ITAT rejected Revenue&#039;s appeal, citing EKL Appliances which negated the need-benefit test, and Magneti Marelli Powertrain which established that TPO cannot segregate transactions already aggregated and benchmarked under TNMM to reduce their ALP to nil under CUP method.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2025 08:15:31 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2025 08:15:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=810282" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Tax Tribunal Allows Assessee&#039;s Appeal on Intra-Group Services, Fixed Asset Mark-ups, and Royalty Payments Under Transfer Pricing Rules</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86956</link>
      <description>ITAT dismissed grounds 1 and 2 regarding validity of assessment order, relying on Aztec Software precedent. The Tribunal allowed ground 3 concerning Intra Group Services, following a coordinate Bench decision in assessee&#039;s own case for AY 2010-11, as Revenue failed to demonstrate distinguishing features in the current assessment year. Similarly, ground 4 regarding disallowance of mark-up charged by AEs on fixed asset purchases was allowed, directing deletion of the ALP adjustment. Regarding royalty payments, ITAT rejected Revenue&#039;s appeal, citing EKL Appliances which negated the need-benefit test, and Magneti Marelli Powertrain which established that TPO cannot segregate transactions already aggregated and benchmarked under TNMM to reduce their ALP to nil under CUP method.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2025 08:15:31 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86956</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>