NIPRO INDIA CORPORATION PVT LTD,PUNE vs. DCIT SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA

ITA 2723/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 September 2026AY 2021-2216 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

The assessee, Nipro India Corporation Pvt. Ltd., appealed an assessment order that made a significant addition to its total income based on transfer pricing adjustments. The addition was made despite the assessee reporting a loss and claiming set-off of brought forward losses.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's profit was affected by substantial depreciation due to high fixed asset investment, and thus directed the TPO to consider PBDIT as the most appropriate profit level indicator. It also directed the TPO to allow working capital adjustment and verify brought forward losses.

What were the issues?

The key issues were whether the transfer pricing adjustment was correctly calculated, particularly regarding depreciation and working capital adjustments, and whether brought forward losses should be allowed for set-off.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C(13),Section 144B,Section 144C(1),Section 92CA,Section 70,Section 71,Section 72

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “C”, PUNE

Before: SHRI Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B Phadke &, Shri Miheer Limaye
For Respondent: Shri A D Kulkarni

PER Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee Nipro India Corporation Pvt. Ltd. against assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) for AY 2021-22 on 23.10.2024, emanating from Dispute Resolution Panel‟s(DRP) order dated 25.09.2024, emanating from draft assessment order, passed u/s 144C(1) of the Act dated 20.12.2023. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :

“1. General Ground

1.

1 The learned DRP Panel-3, Mumbai (referred to as DRP Panel) and the learned DCIT, Satara Circle, Satara (referred to as AO) erred in law and on facts in making addition of Rs. 27,08,33,550 in

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 144C(13)

All 3,299 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(13) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →