https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788596 Transfer pricing disputes concerning AMP adjustment, alleged international transaction, interest on receivables, and comparable selection were treated as covered by binding precedent on materially similar facts. The Delhi HC followed its earlier rulings on AMP issues, including the BLT method, conduct of parties, ownership of intangibles, and alleged brand-building benefit to the associated enterprise, and found no basis to depart from that view. It also applied the earlier decision on receivables interest and the prior order on FAR-based comparable selection. All issues were therefore decided against the Revenue, and the appeals failed. en-us Tue, 17 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Mar 2026 08:49:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788596 Transfer pricing disputes concerning AMP adjustment, alleged international transaction, interest on receivables, and comparable selection were treated as covered by binding precedent on materially similar facts. The Delhi HC followed its earlier rulings on AMP issues, including the BLT method, conduct of parties, ownership of intangibles, and alleged brand-building benefit to the associated enterprise, and found no basis to depart from that view. It also applied the earlier decision on receivables interest and the prior order on FAR-based comparable selection. All issues were therefore decided against the Revenue, and the appeals failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 17 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788596