https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776768 ITAT allowed admission of additional e-mails as evidence regarding receipt of intangible intra-group services, finding they go to the root of the matter. The Tribunal refused to remit the matter to the DRP, noting the DRP is functus officio once directions under s.144C(5) are issued and that verification must be done by the AO. The Tribunal set aside the final assessment and restored the matter to the AO to re-adjudicate transfer-pricing adjustments for intra-group services and interest on outstanding receivables after considering the admitted evidence, affording the assessee an opportunity to be heard. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Aug 2025 08:38:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776768 ITAT allowed admission of additional e-mails as evidence regarding receipt of intangible intra-group services, finding they go to the root of the matter. The Tribunal refused to remit the matter to the DRP, noting the DRP is functus officio once directions under s.144C(5) are issued and that verification must be done by the AO. The Tribunal set aside the final assessment and restored the matter to the AO to re-adjudicate transfer-pricing adjustments for intra-group services and interest on outstanding receivables after considering the admitted evidence, affording the assessee an opportunity to be heard. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776768