M/S QUALCOMM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 307 / 2013HC Delhi15 July 20131 pages
For Petitioner: DEEPAK CHOPRA PDS LEGAL
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court admitted the appeal and framed a substantial question of law regarding the Tribunal's decision to sustain an addition of Rs. 2,59,19,902/-. This addition was made pursuant to an adjustment under Section 92CA(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning international transactions in the business support segment. The High Court has not yet delivered a decision on the merits of the appeal. The excerpt only records the admission of the appeal and the framing of the question of law. The reasoning that led to the Tribunal's decision, the ratio decidendi, and the operative directions are not provided in this excerpt. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the appeal is at its initial stage before the High Court.

What were the facts?

The appeal is filed by M/s Qualcomm India Private Limited (the assessee) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent is the Commissioner of Income Tax-V, New Delhi (the revenue). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated in this excerpt. The order under challenge pertains to an adjustment made under Section 92CA(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, amounting to Rs. 2,59,19,902/-, relating to international transactions in the business support segment. The High Court has admitted the appeal and framed a substantial question of law. The procedural history involves the filing of an application for exemption, which was allowed. The parties are permitted to file documents submitted before the ITAT and the appeal is to be listed as a regular matter.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide one substantial question of law: Whether the tribunal erred in law in sustaining the addition of Rs. 2,59,19,902/-, being the adjustment made under Section 92CA(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the international transactions relating to the business support segment? The assessee's contention, as implied by the framing of the question, is that the Tribunal erred in sustaining the addition. The revenue's contention is that the Tribunal was correct in sustaining the addition. The judgment does not explicitly detail the arguments made by each side before the High Court, nor does it name any specific authorities, circulars, or precedents relied upon by either party in this excerpt.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 92CA(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . . . ITA 307/2013 . . . M/S QUALCOMM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Appellant . Through Mr. Deepak Chopra and Ms. Shruti Sinha, Advocates. . . . versus . . . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V, NEW DELHI... Respondent . Through Mr. N.P. Sahni, sr. standing counsel. . . . CORAM: . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA . . . O R D E R . 15.07.2013 . C.M. 10486/2013 . . . Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. . . . The application is disposed of. . . . ITA 307/2013 . . . Admit. . . . Having heard counsel for the parties, the following substantial question of law is framed:- . . . ?Whether the tribunal erred in law in sustaining addition of Rs.2,59,19,902/- being the adjustment made under the provisions of Section 92CA (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the international transactions relating to the business support segment?? . . . Filing of paper book is dispensed with. However, liberty is granted to the parties to file documents/papers, which were filed before the tribunal as per rules. . List in the category of ?Regular Matters? as per its turn. . . . . . . . SANJIV KHANNA, J. . . . . . . . SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. . JULY 15, 2013 . NA . . . $ 09 .

More judgments on Section 92CA(3)

All 702 judgments and leading authorities on Section 92CA(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →