ASANDAS & SONS PRIVATE LIMITED,MEHSANA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE- GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

ITA 1854/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 June 2025AY 2021-22Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)19 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CUP method was not appropriate due to fundamental differences in quality, volume, and business model. It further held that the Transaction Net Margin Method (TNMM) was the most appropriate method, and based on the assessee's analysis, the transaction was at arm's length, deleting the adjustment.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in manufacturing frozen French fries, purchased potatoes from its wholly-owned subsidiary. The Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) made an upward adjustment of ₹15.99 crores using the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method, which was upheld by the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP).

What were the issues?

Whether the CUP method was the most appropriate method for determining the arm's length price of specified domestic transactions, and if not, whether TNMM was applicable. Also, issues related to book profit computation and penalty proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 92C,Section 115JB,Section 270A,Section 271AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH

Before: DR. BRR Kumar & Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar

PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the final assessment order dated 11-09-2024 passed by the Assessment Unit, arising out of the order passed under section 144C(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the Dispute Resolution Panel-2, Mumbai relating to the Asst. Year 2021-22. I.T.A No. 1854/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2021-22 Page No 2 Asandas & Sons Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT

2.

Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a Private Limited Company (hereinafter referred as ASPL) engaged in the business of manufacturing frozen French f

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 92C

All 1,769 judgments and leading authorities on Section 92C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →