<?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>2026 (7) TMI 774 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794888</link>
    <description>Transfer pricing benchmarking under the Transactional Net Margin Method concerned whether Universal Petro-Chemicals Ltd. and Iftex Oil and Chemicals Ltd. should be included as comparables for a manufacturing segment involving raw-material purchases. The commentary notes that the entities had previously been accepted by the revenue as functionally comparable for the same segment, while no material distinction was identified for the relevant assessment year. Objections based on alleged cherry-picking, low margins, turnover differences and persistent losses were therefore insufficient to justify their exclusion. Their inclusion brought the assessee&#039;s margin within the comparable range and supported determination of the arm&#039;s length price using the expanded comparable set.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2026 08:26:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=911550" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 774 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794888</link>
      <description>Transfer pricing benchmarking under the Transactional Net Margin Method concerned whether Universal Petro-Chemicals Ltd. and Iftex Oil and Chemicals Ltd. should be included as comparables for a manufacturing segment involving raw-material purchases. The commentary notes that the entities had previously been accepted by the revenue as functionally comparable for the same segment, while no material distinction was identified for the relevant assessment year. Objections based on alleged cherry-picking, low margins, turnover differences and persistent losses were therefore insufficient to justify their exclusion. Their inclusion brought the assessee&#039;s margin within the comparable range and supported determination of the arm&#039;s length price using the expanded comparable set.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794888</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>