TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal for AY 2014-15. For AY 2015-16, the Tribunal directed the AO to apply 0.5% as corporate guarantee fee instead of 2% and dismissed other grounds as not pressed. The grounds related to Section 50C were dismissed, and the 15% variation for Section 50C was rejected for the impugned assessment years.
What were the facts?
The assessee challenged the adjustment made by the Assessing Officer (AO) and Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) on account of corporate guarantee fees and the re-computation of Long-Term Capital Gain (LTCG) under Section 50C. The assessee also claimed deduction for education cess and secondary higher education cess as business expenditure.
What were the issues?
Whether corporate guarantee fees are taxable as an international transaction and whether Section 50C is applicable for capital gains computation on property transfer, considering stamp duty valuation and permissible variations.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 92B,Section 50C,Section 48,Section 43(6),Section 37(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(30)Show listHide 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.
- National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT5,834 citing229 ITR 383 · 1998 · SC
- CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala452 citing119 Taxmann 352 · 2001 · SC
- CIT v. Everest Kento Cylinders Ltd.304 citing58 Taxmann.com 254 · 2015 · HC
- Sunil Kumar Agarwal v. CIT159 citing372 ITR 83 · 2015 · HC
- Orissa State Warehousing Corpn v. CIT114 citing237 ITR 589 · 1999 · SC
- ESPN Star Sports Mauritius S.N.C. ET Compagnie v. Union of India71 citing388 ITR 383 · 2016 · HC
- CIT v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd.69 citing398 ITR 439 · 2010 · HC
- Everest Kanto Cylinders Ltd. v. DCIT64 citing34 Taxmann.com 19 · 2013 · ITAT
- Asst. CIT v. Anima Investment Ltd.60 citing73 ITD 125 · 2000 · ITAT
- C.B. Gautam v. Union of India53 citing199 ITR 530 · 1993 · SC
- Dr. Shashi Kant Garg v. CIT42 citing152 Taxmann 308 · 2006 · HC
- International Air Transport Association v. DCIT38 citing241 Taxmann 249 · 2016 · HC
- Everst Kanto Cylinder Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (LTU)30 citing52 Taxmann.com 395 · 2014 · HC
- 10 Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Addl. CIT26 citing43 Taxmann.com 191 · 2014
- Asstt. CIT v. Nimbus Communications24 citing34 Taxmann.com 298 · 2013
- Aditya Birla Minacs Worldwide Ltd. v. JCIT21 citing41 Taxmann.com 386 · 2014 · ITAT
- P&H), CIT vs. Bhan Textiles (P) Ltd. (2006) 287 ITR 370 (Del), CIT v. Lunar Diamonds Ltd.19 citing287 ITR 360 · 2006 · HC
- Rahul Constructions v. DCIT16 citing38 DTR 19 · 2010 · ITAT
- Joint Commissioner of Income Tax v. Chambal Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd.13 citing145 Taxmann.com 420 · 2022 · SC
- 395 (Mum Trib) 4. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Adds CIT9 citing62 SOT 79 · 2014 · ITAT
- DCIT v. Rolta India Limited9 citing101 Taxmann.com 40 · 2019
- Obulapuram Mining Company (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT8 citing43 SOT 32 · 2011 · ITAT
- ACIT v. Oracle India (P.) Ltd.7 citing93 Taxmann.com 8 · 2018 · HC
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1) Agra v. Tarun Agarwal7 citing97 Taxmann.com 346 · 2018
- Everready Industries India Ltd. v. PCIT7 citing181 ITD 528 · 2020 · ITAT
- ITO v. Pawan Kumar Gupta7 citing50 ITD 1 · 1994 · ITAT
- Tatia Skyline & Health Farms Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT6 citing70 ITD 387 · 1999 · ITAT
- Third Member) in CIT v. Rohtas Projects Ltd.6 citing100 ITD 113 · 2006 · ITAT
- Kinetic Honda Motors Ltd. v. JCIT4 citing77 ITD 393 · ITAT
- North Shore Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. ITO4 citing118 Taxmann.com 624 · 2020 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH KOL-
Before: SHRI SONJOY SARMA & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
These appeals filed by the assessee are against the two separate orders both dated 30/07/2021 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata-22 [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] passed Tata Consumer Products Ltd. {erstwhile Tata Global Beverages Ltd.} AYs: 2014-15 & 2015-16
u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16. As both the appeals involve a common issue, the same were heard together and are being disposed of vide this common order for the sak
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 →- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026