<?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>2018 (5) TMI 2197 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465567</link>
    <description>The dominant issue was whether the TPO could reject the assessee&#039;s segmental accounts and benchmark international transactions on an entity-wide basis. The Tribunal held that domestic-segment losses, explained by severe competition, premium pricing in international segments, higher quality-cost standards, and the industry&#039;s long gestation period, did not justify discarding segmental results; consistent acceptance in an earlier year reinforced this. Segmental accounts were directed to be accepted and the assessee&#039;s benchmarking not to be rejected. The Tribunal further held that, even if entity-wide margins were applied, any TP adjustment must be restricted to the value of international transactions, and a pending SLP could not dilute binding jurisdictional precedent. Working-capital adjustment was directed to be applied consistently, multiple non-comparable companies were excluded, and the assessee&#039;s AE margins were held at ALP, resulting in deletion of TP adjustment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2025 16:27:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=875054" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 2197 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465567</link>
      <description>The dominant issue was whether the TPO could reject the assessee&#039;s segmental accounts and benchmark international transactions on an entity-wide basis. The Tribunal held that domestic-segment losses, explained by severe competition, premium pricing in international segments, higher quality-cost standards, and the industry&#039;s long gestation period, did not justify discarding segmental results; consistent acceptance in an earlier year reinforced this. Segmental accounts were directed to be accepted and the assessee&#039;s benchmarking not to be rejected. The Tribunal further held that, even if entity-wide margins were applied, any TP adjustment must be restricted to the value of international transactions, and a pending SLP could not dilute binding jurisdictional precedent. Working-capital adjustment was directed to be applied consistently, multiple non-comparable companies were excluded, and the assessee&#039;s AE margins were held at ALP, resulting in deletion of TP adjustment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465567</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>