https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777549 HC held that the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) is binding on the Assessing Officer (AO) and the AO cannot determine the arm's length price without reference to the TPO under s.92CA(1). Relying on the SC's precedent and CBDT guidance, the court found that once the TPO completed proceedings without adjustments, the AO lacked jurisdiction to reopen or make fresh TP adjustments on the same material. Petition allowed; AO's assessment revisions set aside. en-us Tue, 05 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Sep 2025 08:13:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777549 HC held that the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) is binding on the Assessing Officer (AO) and the AO cannot determine the arm's length price without reference to the TPO under s.92CA(1). Relying on the SC's precedent and CBDT guidance, the court found that once the TPO completed proceedings without adjustments, the AO lacked jurisdiction to reopen or make fresh TP adjustments on the same material. Petition allowed; AO's assessment revisions set aside. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 05 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777549