GEMOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF AMERICA, INC.,UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), RANGE 2(3)(2) - MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 8248/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 March 2026AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that this was a second round of litigation and that in the first round, the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer (AO) to verify records and determine royalty as per the APA. The Tribunal observed that the modified return filed pursuant to the APA was not considered by the lower authorities. Relying on a previous decision in the assessee's own case, the Tribunal allowed the ground in principle but remitted it back to the AO for verification of factual elements.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged an order by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax for the assessment year 2020-21. The dispute concerns the correct computation of royalty income and the non-granting of interest. The assessee had entered into an Advance Pricing Agreement (APA), which led to a modified return of income, but this was allegedly not considered by the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

Whether the royalty income was correctly computed considering the Advance Pricing Agreement (APA) and whether interest under Section 244A of the Income Tax Act should be granted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 254,Section 144C,Section 92CD,Section 244A,Section 44DA,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “I” BENCH MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry-Sr. Adv./Gunjan Kakkad
For Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar (SR. DR.)
Hearing: 03.02.2026Pronounced: 09.03.2026

PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 03.09.2025 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(3)(2), Mumbai, for the assessment year 2020-21. The following grounds are reproduced below:

2 Gemological Institute of America, Inc.

“1:0 Re.: Non-consideration of the correct amount of royalty for the year: 1 1 The Assessing Officer / the Dispute Resolution Panel have erred in holding that the Appellant's 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

All 3,699 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →