<?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>TNMM upheld for arm&#039;s length pricing; CUP-based transfer pricing adjustment deleted on identical facts.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99162</link>
    <description>In a transfer pricing dispute over specified domestic transactions for purchase of potatoes from an associated enterprise, the Tribunal held that the earlier coordinate bench ruling in the assessee&#039;s own case for the preceding year governed the issue on identical facts. Applying judicial discipline, it rejected the DRP&#039;s attempt to keep the matter open for the Revenue and found that CUP was not the most appropriate method. TNMM was upheld as the appropriate arm&#039;s length method, so the transfer pricing adjustment based on CUP was deleted. As the substantive addition did not survive, the consequential penalty proceedings for alleged under-reporting or misreporting under section 270A were rendered infructuous.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2026 08:51:42 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2026 08:51:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=898361" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>TNMM upheld for arm&#039;s length pricing; CUP-based transfer pricing adjustment deleted on identical facts.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99162</link>
      <description>In a transfer pricing dispute over specified domestic transactions for purchase of potatoes from an associated enterprise, the Tribunal held that the earlier coordinate bench ruling in the assessee&#039;s own case for the preceding year governed the issue on identical facts. Applying judicial discipline, it rejected the DRP&#039;s attempt to keep the matter open for the Revenue and found that CUP was not the most appropriate method. TNMM was upheld as the appropriate arm&#039;s length method, so the transfer pricing adjustment based on CUP was deleted. As the substantive addition did not survive, the consequential penalty proceedings for alleged under-reporting or misreporting under section 270A were rendered infructuous.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2026 08:51:42 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99162</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>