SAS INSTITUTE (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT,CIRCLE- 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6671/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 August 2026AY 2008-0927 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the rejection of the CUP method by the AO was not sustainable as the associated enterprise status of MIA Computers Limited was not properly established. The matter was remanded to the AO to re-examine the comparability under the CUP method, considering material differences and the possibility of adjustments.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against assessment orders for AY 2008-09 and 2010-11 concerning transfer pricing adjustments. The primary dispute involved the appropriateness of the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method versus the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) for benchmarking royalty payments.

What were the issues?

Whether the CUP method was wrongly rejected and TNMM inappropriately applied for benchmarking royalty payments, and whether the assessment orders were time-barred.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 92A,Section 92C,Section 153,Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI, HON’BLE & SHRI JAGADISH, HON’BLE

For Respondent: Shri. Pravin Salunkhe, Sr
Pronounced: 17/08/2026

PER SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

The present appeals filed by the assessee arise out of the respective final assessment orders passed by the ACIT-1(3)(1), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the "Ld. AO") dated 23/08/2019 for A.Ys. 2008–09 and 2010–11 on the following grounds of appeal:-

“ 2008-09

Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, SAS Insti

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 92A

All 117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 92A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →