| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 1361 (Del-Trib) : (2020) 078 ITR (Trib) 0084 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 92C
Where the comparable company selected by TPO was functionally dissimilar to assessee, the said company was not a good comparable and hence, the same was liable to be excluded from the list of comparables.
|
Transfer pricing - Computation of ALP - Selection of comparables - Functional dissimilarity
For purpose of benchmarking marketing support services provided by assessee-company to its AE, TPO included company 'H' as a comparable. Assessee contended that the 'H' was functionally dissimilar and was engaged in the business of payroll processing and compensation restructuring. Held: Where the comparable company selected by TPO was engaged in business of payroll processing and compensation restructuring, the said company was functionally dissimilar to the assessee in respect of its marketing support services. Therefore, the 'H' was not a good comparable because of the functional dissimilarity and hence, the same was excluded from the list of comparables.
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. : 2011-12
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 92C
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|