{"id":44820,"date":"2024-08-01T12:16:49","date_gmt":"2024-08-01T06:46:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/dy-cit-v-hsbc-asset-management-i-p-ltd-2023106-itr-676-153-taxmann-com-20-mum-trib\/"},"modified":"2024-08-01T12:16:49","modified_gmt":"2024-08-01T06:46:49","slug":"dy-cit-v-hsbc-asset-management-i-p-ltd-2023106-itr-676-153-taxmann-com-20-mum-trib","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/dy-cit-v-hsbc-asset-management-i-p-ltd-2023106-itr-676-153-taxmann-com-20-mum-trib\/","title":{"rendered":"DY. CIT v. HSBC Asset Management (I) P. Ltd. (2023)106 ITR 676 \/ 153 taxmann.com 20 (Mum) (Trib)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Held that\u00a0 in terms of the assessee\u2019s own case on a similar issue for an earlier assessment year, once various services availed of from associated enterprises were duly substantiated by documentary evidence and the cost allocation among the group companies was also on the basis of the well accepted allocation key method or on a cost-to-cost basis, there was no ground to uphold the transfer pricing adjustment made by the Transfer Pricing Officer. The Assessing Officer was directed to delete the transfer pricing adjustment on account of payment of cost allocation charges towards central and regional support services as well as towards software development and other information technology services. Appeal of Revenue also dismissed on the ground that\u00a0 as the tax effect on the amount disputed by the Revenue was below the revised monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000. (AY. 2008-09)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm\u2019s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Expenses allocated on cost-to-cost basis-Transfer pricing adjustments  deleted-Tax effect less than prescribed limit of  Rs. 50 Lakhs-Appeal of Revenue is held to be not maintainable . [ S.92CA , 253(1) ]  <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-44820","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-bEU","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44820","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=44820"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44820\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":44821,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44820\/revisions\/44821"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=44820"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=44820"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=44820"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}