AMADEUS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), DELHI
What were the facts?
The assessee, Amadeus India Private Limited, filed a return of income declaring Nil income. The case was selected for scrutiny due to large international transactions and low profitability. The Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) proposed an adjustment of Rs. 18.75 crore on account of Advertisement, Marketing, and Promotion (AMP) expenses.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the TPO wrongly invoked the provisions of Chapter X of the Income Tax Act for AMP expenses. Following jurisdictional precedents, it was decided that in the absence of a specific transaction for brand promotion between the assessee and its associated enterprise, no transfer pricing adjustment could be made.
What were the issues?
Whether AMP expenses incurred by the assessee constitute an international transaction for which transfer pricing adjustment can be made in the absence of a specific agreement or understanding with the associated enterprise.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 92B,Section 92F,Section 143(3),Section 144C(13),Section 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “I” BENCH, DELHI
Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR
PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: The appeal filed by the assessee is against Final assessment order dated 08.10.2024 of the Ld. Assessing Officer (‘AO’) under section 143(3)
P a g e | 2 Amadeus India Private Limited
r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for Assessment year (‘AY’) 2021-22. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 24.02.2022 declaring an income of Rs. Nil. The case of assessee was selected for scrutiny for the reasons:
(i) Large value of International transactions in service
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 92B
- Flora Biochem Private Limited, Coimbatore vs DCIT, CoimbatoreITA 1123/CHNY/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Satyam Venture Engineering Services Pvt… vs ACIT, Central Circle-3(2), HyderabadITTPA 12/HYD/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
- Satyam Venture Engineering Services Pvt… vs ACIT, Central Circle-3(2), HyderabadITTPA 11/HYD/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- Satyam Venture Engineering Services Pvt… vs ACIT, Central Circle-3(2), HyderabadITTPA 10/HYD/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
- Satyam Venture Engineering Services Private… vs ACIT, Central Circle-3(2), HyderabadITA 9/HYD/2026[2011-2012]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2011-2012
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Smita Chawda vs. Aadharshila Developers PVT LTD.Chhattisgarh · 6 Oct 2026
- Sahil vs. M/S Aadharshila Developers PVT LTD.Chhattisgarh · 6 Oct 2026
- Mayank Arc And Electrodes Private Limited & Anr. vs. Assistant Commissioner CGST Laxmi Nagar Division & Ors.Delhi · 6 Oct 2026
- Jogender Proprietor Of M/S J.K. Construction vs. The Joint Commissioner (Appeals-Ii) & Anr.Delhi · 6 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Murugan Tyres vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer-1/ The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 6 Oct 2026