<?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>2025 (5) TMI 2197 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464335</link>
    <description>ITAT HYDERABAD upheld the 10x turnover tolerance (both up and down) as a valid comparability filter and excluded 12 comparables that breached it. The tribunal directed the TPO to apply this turnover filter uniformly to all remaining comparables. One specific comparable was excluded for lack of functional similarity; three others were held non-comparable. Another comparable was retained as functionally similar (ITES-type support services). A separate comparable&#039;s exclusion was remitted to the DRP for rectification of an apparent error, and one more comparable was sent back to the AO/TPO to verify reported service revenue before deciding inclusion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2025 12:10:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=859543" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 2197 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464335</link>
      <description>ITAT HYDERABAD upheld the 10x turnover tolerance (both up and down) as a valid comparability filter and excluded 12 comparables that breached it. The tribunal directed the TPO to apply this turnover filter uniformly to all remaining comparables. One specific comparable was excluded for lack of functional similarity; three others were held non-comparable. Another comparable was retained as functionally similar (ITES-type support services). A separate comparable&#039;s exclusion was remitted to the DRP for rectification of an apparent error, and one more comparable was sent back to the AO/TPO to verify reported service revenue before deciding inclusion.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464335</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>