M/S RAMBUS CHIP TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw its appeal due to the MAP resolution. Consequently, the revenue's appeal, which also pertained to transfer pricing, was dismissed.
What were the facts?
The assessee company filed an appeal against a transfer pricing adjustment. The dispute was subsequently resolved under the Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP).
What were the issues?
Whether the transfer pricing adjustment is valid and if the MAP resolution resolves the dispute for both parties.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Rule 44G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE
Before: SHRI B. R. BASKARAN & SMT. BEENA PILLAI
PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
These cross appeals are directed against the order dated 27.12.2017 passed by Ld. CIT(A)-5, Bengaluru and they relate to the assessment year 2012-13. The grounds urged by the assessee relate to transfer pricing adjustment partially confirmed by Ld. CIT(A). The grounds urged by the revenue related to working capital adjustment granted by Ld. CIT(A).
Before us, the assessee has filed a letter dated August, 2, 2021 stating that the dispute has been resolved under Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) as per Rule 44G of the Income Tax Rules. Accordingly, the assessee submitted that it is withdrawing the appeal filed by it. The assessee has also furnished a letter dated July, 5, 2021 received from Ministry of Finance, Government of India conveying the MAP resolution. We notice that the TPO has made adjustment of Rs.4,26,74,970/- and the competent authorities have determined the adjustment at Rs.1,52,87,317/-. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee has agreed with the MAP procedure. He further submitted that the appeal filed by the department also related to transfer pricing adjustment only and hence this MAP resolution would cover their appeal also.
We heard Ld. D.R. and perused the record. Since the issue relating to transfer pricing adjustment has been resolved under MAP, we allow the assessee to withdraw its appeal. Consequently, the appeal filed by the department will also not survive. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal of the revenue. & 1185/Bang/2018 M/s. Rambus Chip Technologies (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore
Page 3 of 3 4. In the result, both the appeals are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 11th Aug, 2021
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026