GUJRAT GUARDIAN LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the additional ground regarding sales tax incentives. The Tribunal admitted this ground and decided to adjudicate it, stating that the Goetz India Ltd. decision does not fetter appellate authorities' powers to consider new claims.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Gujarat Guardian Ltd., engaged in the manufacture and sale of float glass, had international transactions with its associated enterprises. The TPO applied the CUP method to benchmark these transactions, while the assessee had used the TNMM method. The CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee's appeal, restricting the TPO's adjustment.
What were the issues?
Whether the TPO correctly applied the CUP method over the TNMM method for benchmarking international transactions. Whether the CIT(A) erred in not admitting an additional ground regarding sales tax incentives as capital receipts.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(8)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT1,842 citing284 ITR 323 · 2006 · SC
- CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd.968 citing312 ITR 254 · 2009 · SC · Read judgment
- CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd.814 citing198 ITR 297 · 1992 · SC · Read judgment
- TRF Ltd. v. CIT714 citing323 ITR 397 · 2010 · SC
- CIT v. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.577 citing306 ITR 392 · 2008 · SC · Read judgment
- CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd.120 citing294 ITR 451 · 2007 · HC · Read judgment
- Aztec Software & Technologies Services Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT90 citing107 ITD 141 · 2007 · ITAT
- Karnataka in Karnataka State Co-Operative Apex Bank Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 3(1) Bangalore10 citing283 Taxmann 98 · 2021 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES, ‘H NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
PER PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMB
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 92CA
- Bellsonica Auto Component India Private… vs ACIT, Circle-1(1), GurgaonITA 1041/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Smartstream Technologies India Private… vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 2220/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- ACIT-Circle 6(1)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited, MumbaiITA 7767/MUM/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- ACIT-Circle6(1)(1) Mumbai., Mumbai vs Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited, MumbaiITA 7766/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Airmeet Networks Private Limited, Bengaluru vs Assessing Officer, BengaluruITA 1487/BANG/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Jharkhand Contractors Association Thro Its President- Pramod Kumar vs. Bharat Coking Coal LTD. Thro Its Chairman Cum Managing DirectorJharkhand · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Isc Processors Private Limited vs. Superintendent,Range-Iv, Burrabazar Div, CGST And Cx, Kolkata (N) Commissionerate And AnrCalcutta · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Raashi Constructions vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Bidasaria Fenster Solutions vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 13 Oct 2026
- Amit Agency vs. Commissioner, CGST And CxPatna · 13 Oct 2026