<?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>ITAT sets aside transfer pricing adjustments on management fees and R&amp;amp;D expenses for inadequate examination</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89910</link>
    <description>ITAT allowed assessee&#039;s appeal for statistical purposes regarding transfer pricing adjustments on management services fees and R&amp;D expenses paid to associated enterprises. TPO made upward ALP adjustments citing inadequate documentation, confirmed by DRP. However, assessee subsequently filed additional evidence including service agreements and correspondence with AEs before DRP, which called for remand report from TPO/AO that was never furnished. ITAT noted TPO lacks jurisdiction under section 37 to examine expenditure allowability per CIT v. Lever India Exports Limited precedent. Since assessee provided prima facie evidence substantiating arm&#039;s length pricing but TPO failed to examine such evidence or compute adjustments per prescribed meth.....</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2025 08:32:05 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2025 08:32:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=832332" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>ITAT sets aside transfer pricing adjustments on management fees and R&amp;amp;D expenses for inadequate examination</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89910</link>
      <description>ITAT allowed assessee&#039;s appeal for statistical purposes regarding transfer pricing adjustments on management services fees and R&amp;D expenses paid to associated enterprises. TPO made upward ALP adjustments citing inadequate documentation, confirmed by DRP. However, assessee subsequently filed additional evidence including service agreements and correspondence with AEs before DRP, which called for remand report from TPO/AO that was never furnished. ITAT noted TPO lacks jurisdiction under section 37 to examine expenditure allowability per CIT v. Lever India Exports Limited precedent. Since assessee provided prima facie evidence substantiating arm&#039;s length pricing but TPO failed to examine such evidence or compute adjustments per prescribed meth.....</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2025 08:32:05 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89910</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>