Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.23 seconds)

Seshasayee Paper & Board Ltd vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax on 15 May, 2015

Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT [2011] 12 taxmann.com 84/46 SOT 294 (URO) (Mum.-Trib), held to the same effect. We find from the record that the TPO/AO had not undertaken the exercise of going into the reasons for abnormal losses. Therefore we remit back to the file of TPO/AO to undertake this exercise, and if it is found that the losses are incurred not on account of any special reasons and is a normal business loss to include it in the list of comparables otherwise to exclude the same from list of the comparables.
Supreme Court of India Cites 30 - Cited by 213 - A K Sikri - Full Document

Aztec Software And Technology Service ... vs Acit on 12 July, 2007

Ltd. v ACIT [2013] 33 taxmann.com 4 (Mum- Trib.) and ACIT v M/s. Hapag Lloyd Global Services Pvt Ltd TS-47-ITAT-2013 (Mum)-TP and respectively following the decisions, we direct that this company cannot be included in the list of comparables with that of the assessee company IT(TP)A No.442/Bang/2011& IT(TP)A No.444&445/Bang/2011 Page 38 of 39 and accordingly, we uphold the decision of the CIT(A) to delete this company from the list of comparables, though on a different reasoning.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 100 - Cited by 254 - Full Document

Gvk Inds. Ltd & Anr vs The Income Tax Officer & Anr on 1 March, 2011

24. Even the special bench in the case of IHG IT Services (India) (P.) Ltd. V. ITO [2013] 33 taxmann.com 1 (Delhi - Trib.) (SB) held that after the amendment by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 with effect from 1.10.2009, such benefit of 5% tolerance margin was restricted to the cases where variation between the arm's length price and the price at IT(TP)A No.442/Bang/2011& IT(TP)A No.444&445/Bang/2011 Page 25 of 39 which the international transaction has actually taken place does not exceed 5%. In other words the benefit under the proviso cannot be given as a standard deduction. In the results, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue on this issue are allowed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 25 - Cited by 855 - Full Document
1   2 Next