Asstt. CIT v. MSS India (P.) Ltd.

32 SOT 132Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#4568 most cited

What is Asstt. CIT v. MSS India (P.) Ltd. authority for?

The profit margin earned by an assessee is not relevant when the transaction is at arm's length, and there is no requirement for associated enterprises to ensure they make a reasonable profit margin.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Also referred to as

MSS India (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT · 32 SOT 132 · transfer pricing · arm's length · profit margin · associated enterprise · ALP · Rule 10B

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(3)Section 201(1A)Section 234CSection 32(1)(ii)Section 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

resale price methodcost plus methodfunctional analysissection 54esection 115jcfar analysissection 54ecminimum alternate taxsection 112section 80ib(10)prejudicial to interest of revenuesection 40(a)(ii)

Judgments citing Asstt. CIT v. MSS India (P.) Ltd.

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 500/JPR/2023[215-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

…d in Rule 10AB of the Rules as held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Toll Global Forwarding (381 ITR 38). (b) Profit margin earned by the appellant is not relevant when the transaction is at arm’s length as held by Hon’ble Pune Tribunal in MSS India (32 SOT 132). (c) In the present facts of the case, CPM method cannot be applied since determination of gross profit margin is a difficult and subjective exercise in absence of proper data. 99. Considering the above findings, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), accordingly the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) is upheld. The ground no. 4…

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 496/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

…d in Rule 10AB of the Rules as held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Toll Global Forwarding (381 ITR 38). (b) Profit margin earned by the appellant is not relevant when the transaction is at arm’s length as held by Hon’ble Pune Tribunal in MSS India (32 SOT 132). (c) In the present facts of the case, CPM method cannot be applied since determination of gross profit margin is a difficult and subjective exercise in absence of proper data. 99. Considering the above findings, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), accordingly the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) is upheld. The ground no. 4…

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 152/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 250Section 32(1)(ii)Section 80Section 80I

…of the Act requires an assessee to determine income having regard to the ALP. Once ALP has been determined and is acceptable in terms of Rule 10B of the Income Tax Rules, the profit arrived at is just consequential. In MSS India (P.) Ltd. vs. Asst. CIT (2009) 32 SOT 132 (Pune- Trib.) it has been held that the transfer pricing provisions do require the transactions to be ALP but there is no such requirement that the AE must enter into transactions in such a manner as to ensure that the AEs are allowed to make a reasonable profit margin. Ld. CIT(A) in its order dated 20-01-2023 upheld the aforesaid view of the ass…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. GULBRANDSEN CHEMICALS PVT. LTD, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 559/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 559/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-12 D.C.I.T., Gulbrandsen Chemicals Pvt. Ltd, Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. On Coastal Highway, Vadodara. Mujpur, Tal. Padra, Vadodara.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT.D.R
Section 92Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…uch a direct method will have an edge over application of indirect method of ascertaining the arm's length price. This principle has been reiterated in a large number of decisions of the coordinate benches, such as in the case of AC1T Vs MSS India Ltd [(2009) 32 SOT 132 (Pune) and Serdia Pharmaceutical India Pvt Ltd VS ACIT 1(2011) 44 SOT 391 (Mum)]. Going by this principle, all other things being equal, a direct method like Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method will have an edge over an indirect method like Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM). That does not, and cannot, however mean that whatever be the…

AMC COOKWARE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 182/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Deva Rathna Kumar, CIT (DR)

…old within a short period of purchases and influence of other factors is found to be minimal." 10.14 Similar observations with regard to the applicability of TNMM were made by the Hon'ble Tribunal, Pune Bench, in the case of ACIT vs. MSS India Pvt. Ltd 2009/ 32 SOT 132 (Pune - Trib.) which held as under "...... In our considered view, the transaction profit methods should be applied only when standard or traditional methods are incapable of being properly applied on the facts of a case. While traditional methods seek to compute the Page 15 of 22 IT(TP)A No. 182/Bang/2017 prices at which international transaction…

TRL RICELAND PVT. LTD.,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S TILDA RICELAND P.LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 9, NEW DELHI

ITA 5508/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Meera Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 271(1)(C)Section 92C

…not provide for any order of preference in selection of the most appropriate method, no such order of preference—direct or implied, can be exercised by us either. 61. This issue is no longer res integra. In the case of Asstt. CIT v. MSS India (P.) Ltd. (2009) 32 SOT 132 (Pune), a Co- ordinate Bench of this Tribunal, speaking through one of us (i.e. the AM), had, inter alia, observed that "While there is no particular order or priority of methods which the assessee must follow, and no method can invariably be considered to be more reliable than others, on a conceptual note, transactional profit methods (i.e., TNMM…

M/S TRL RICELAND PVT. LTD.,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S TILDA RICELAND P.LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. ADDLCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 441/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Meera Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 271(1)(C)Section 92C

…not provide for any order of preference in selection of the most appropriate method, no such order of preference—direct or implied, can be exercised by us either. 61. This issue is no longer res integra. In the case of Asstt. CIT v. MSS India (P.) Ltd. (2009) 32 SOT 132 (Pune), a Co- ordinate Bench of this Tribunal, speaking through one of us (i.e. the AM), had, inter alia, observed that "While there is no particular order or priority of methods which the assessee must follow, and no method can invariably be considered to be more reliable than others, on a conceptual note, transactional profit methods (i.e., TNMM…

DENTSPLY INDIA PVT LTD vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 752/DEL/2009[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 752/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2002-03 Ita No. 1682/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2003-04 Ita No. 4195/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No. 263, Fies, Patparganj Circle-10(1), Industrial Area, Delhi-110092 New Delhi (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd3171E Assessee By : Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Meera Srivastava, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Meera Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 254

…. In support of this contention, he relied upon the following decisions of the Tribunal:– i) DCIT vs MCI Com India P. Ltd., ITA no.2766 & 4187/Del./ 2010; and ITA Nos. 752, 1682 & 4195/Del/2009 17 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd. ii) ACIT vs MSS India P. Ltd., [2009] 32 SOT 132 (Pune); and iii) Gap International Sourcing India P. Ltd., 149 TTJ 437. 29. Relying on these decisions, he submitted that RPM should be followed in the present case for determination of ALP while evaluating the controlled transactions of the assessee. 30. Regarding the comparables as selected by the assessee and accepted by the TPO, he submitted…

DENTSPLY INDIA PVT. LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4195/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 752/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2002-03 Ita No. 1682/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2003-04 Ita No. 4195/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No. 263, Fies, Patparganj Circle-10(1), Industrial Area, Delhi-110092 New Delhi (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd3171E Assessee By : Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Meera Srivastava, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Meera Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 254

…. In support of this contention, he relied upon the following decisions of the Tribunal:– i) DCIT vs MCI Com India P. Ltd., ITA no.2766 & 4187/Del./ 2010; and ITA Nos. 752, 1682 & 4195/Del/2009 17 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd. ii) ACIT vs MSS India P. Ltd., [2009] 32 SOT 132 (Pune); and iii) Gap International Sourcing India P. Ltd., 149 TTJ 437. 29. Relying on these decisions, he submitted that RPM should be followed in the present case for determination of ALP while evaluating the controlled transactions of the assessee. 30. Regarding the comparables as selected by the assessee and accepted by the TPO, he submitted…

DENTSPLY INDIA PVT. LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1682/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 752/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2002-03 Ita No. 1682/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2003-04 Ita No. 4195/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No. 263, Fies, Patparganj Circle-10(1), Industrial Area, Delhi-110092 New Delhi (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd3171E Assessee By : Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Meera Srivastava, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Meera Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 254

…. In support of this contention, he relied upon the following decisions of the Tribunal:– i) DCIT vs MCI Com India P. Ltd., ITA no.2766 & 4187/Del./ 2010; and ITA Nos. 752, 1682 & 4195/Del/2009 17 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd. ii) ACIT vs MSS India P. Ltd., [2009] 32 SOT 132 (Pune); and iii) Gap International Sourcing India P. Ltd., 149 TTJ 437. 29. Relying on these decisions, he submitted that RPM should be followed in the present case for determination of ALP while evaluating the controlled transactions of the assessee. 30. Regarding the comparables as selected by the assessee and accepted by the TPO, he submitted…

CIBA INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. JCIT (OSD) RG 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4210/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal a/wFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan

…micals (India) Ltd. v JCIT (44 taxmann.com 421)Mum. 20. Thomas Cook (India) Ltd. v DCIT (70 taxmann.com 322) 21. Benetton India (P.) Ltd. v DCIT (87 taxmann.com 241) (Del.) 22. Qual Core Logic Ltd v DCIT (22 taxmann.com 4) (Hyd.) 23. ACIT v MSS India (P) Ltd (32 SOT 132) (Pune) 24. McCann Erickson India Pvt. Ltd. v ACIT (24 taxmann.com 21 (Del.) 6. The learned Departmental Representative, strongly relying upon the observations of the Transfer Pricing Officer and learned Commissioner (Appeals) submitted, the assessee has to prove through supporting evidence that any international transaction conducted with the AE…

M/S BERGEN ENGINES INDIA PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5543/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing) Bergen Engines India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit 2Nd Floor, 52-B, Okhla Circle-4(2) Industrial Estate, New Delhi Phase-3, Okhla New Delhi Aaecb7223M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 92C

…cogent objections with respect to the choice of filters and consequently the search process carried out by the assessee. A similar view has been upheld in M/s Frigoglass India Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT [ITA No. 463/Del/2013] and ACIT vs. MSS India (P.) Ltd [ITAT-2009 -32 SOT 132- PUNE], establishing that the search process of the assessee cannot be rejected without cogent reasons. 13 12. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the TPO and the order of the DRP. 13. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that out of 6 quantitative filters used by the T…

TPR AUTOPARTS MFG INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 25(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4744/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Tpr Autoparts Mfg. India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Mayur Batra & Co., Ca, Circle-25(2), 7, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aacct9433D (Appellants) (Respondents) Assessee By : Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate Deptt. By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit, Dr & Ms Nidhi Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.12.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27Th December, 2016 Of The Cit(A)-44, New Delhi, Relating To The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Company Is A Wholly Owned Subsidiary Of M/S Teikoku Piston Ring Co. Ltd. (Japan). It Had Been Incorporated On 27.03.2008 With The Main Object To Carry On The Business To Manufacture, Export, Buy & Sell & Otherwise Deal In ‘Moulded’ Automobile Products I.E. Piston Rings, Cylinder Liners, Valve Seat Rings & Other Automotive Parts. It Is The Third Year Of Its Existence, Though Effectively It Is The Second Year Of Production After Its Set Up & Commencement Of Business In The Fy 2009-10. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 29.11.2011 Declaring A Loss Of Rs.6,45,23,822/-. Since The Assessee Had Entered Into Certain International Transactions With Its Aes, The Assessing Officer Referred The Matter To The Transfer Pricing Officer U/S 92Ca Of The Act For Determination Of The Arm’S Length Price Of Such International Transactions. The Tpo, During The Course Of Tp Assessment Proceedings, Observed That The Assessee Company Has Undertaken The Following International Transactions With Its Aes:- No. Nature Of Transaction Method Amount (In Rs.) Purchase Of Raw 1 5,85,47,963 Materials/Assets/Spares Tnmm Payment Of Royalty 76,32,183 2 Tnmm 3 Reimbursement Of Expenses To Ae 9,14,253 -

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate
Section 92C

…td. DCIT reported in 16 Taxmann.com 352 4. DCIT Vs. Vertex Customer Services India Pvt. Ltd. reported in (2009) 34 SOT 532 (Del). 5. Global Vantedge Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT reported in (2010) 1 ITR (Tri) 326 (Del) 6. ACIT Vs. MSS India Pvt. Ltd. reported in (2009) 32 SOT 132 (Pune) 7. DCIT Vs. Petro Araldite Pvt.Ltd. reported in (2013) 145 ITD (Mum) 182 8. DCIT vs. Terex India (P) Ltd. (2019) 71 ITR 259 (Delhi ITAT) 9. DCIT vs. Panasonic AVC Networks India Co. Ltd., 63 Sot 121 (Del) 11. The ld. DR, on the other hand, while supporting the order of the CIT(A), submitted that the comparables selected by the TPO were neve…

GULBRANDSEN CHEMICALS PRIVATE LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 2276/AHD/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Feb 2019AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 274Section 92Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…ITA No.: 2276/Ahd/2013 Assessment year: 2008-09 Page 1 of 11 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD D BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar VP and Mahavir Prasad JM] ITA No.: 2276/Ahd/ 2013 Assessment year: 2008-09 Gulbrandsen Chemicals Pvt Ltd ……………………..Appellant On Coastal Highway, PO Mujpur Tal Padra Vadodara 391 440 [PAN: AABCG 0812 A] Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1), Vadodara ……………..…........Respondent Appearances by S N Soparkar, Sharad Jain, Bandish Soparkar and Parin Shah for the assessee V K Singh, Subhash Bains and MSA Khan for the revenue Date of concluding the hearing : N…

GULBRANDSEN CHEMICALS PVT.LTD.,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 874/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Feb 2019AY 2007-08
Section 143(3)Section 92

…od of ascertaining the arm’s length price. This principle has been reiterated in a large number of decisions of the coordinate benches, such as in the case of ACIT Vs MSS India Ltd [(2009) ITA No.: 874 and 760/Ahd/2012 Assessment years: 2007-08 Page 8 of 21 32 SOT 132 (Pune) and Serdia Pharmaceuticals India Pvt Ltd VS ACIT [(2011) 44 SOT 391 (Mum)]. Going by this principle, all other things being equal, a direct method like Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method will have an edge over an indirect method like Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM). That does not, and cannot, however mean that whatever be the…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA vs. GULBRANDSEN CHEMICALS PVT.LTD.,, BARODA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 760/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Feb 2019AY 2007-08
Section 143(3)Section 92

…od of ascertaining the arm’s length price. This principle has been reiterated in a large number of decisions of the coordinate benches, such as in the case of ACIT Vs MSS India Ltd [(2009) ITA No.: 874 and 760/Ahd/2012 Assessment years: 2007-08 Page 8 of 21 32 SOT 132 (Pune) and Serdia Pharmaceuticals India Pvt Ltd VS ACIT [(2011) 44 SOT 391 (Mum)]. Going by this principle, all other things being equal, a direct method like Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method will have an edge over an indirect method like Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM). That does not, and cannot, however mean that whatever be the…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S JSL LTD.,, HISAR

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 4110/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr. DR
Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…d transactions. In that particular case the price quote given by the broker was based on the prices prevalent in the commodity exchanges and other market including Chicago Board of trade. Further in the case of the ACIT versus MSS India private limited (2009) 32 SOT 132 (Pune) the rates adopted were based on rates prevailing at London metal exchange with respect to the raw material mainly consisting of copper and lead. Therefore, it is apparent that if the quotations are authentic and reliable then only they can be used as comparable in CUP method. In this background, we examine the quotations taken by the assess…

JINDAL STAINLESS LTD.,HISAR vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 6337/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr. DR
Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…d transactions. In that particular case the price quote given by the broker was based on the prices prevalent in the commodity exchanges and other market including Chicago Board of trade. Further in the case of the ACIT versus MSS India private limited (2009) 32 SOT 132 (Pune) the rates adopted were based on rates prevailing at London metal exchange with respect to the raw material mainly consisting of copper and lead. Therefore, it is apparent that if the quotations are authentic and reliable then only they can be used as comparable in CUP method. In this background, we examine the quotations taken by the assess…

AT&S INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KARNATAKA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed

ITA 69/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am At&S India Private Limited Vs. Dcit, Circle 11(1), Kolkata P-7, Chowringhee Square, 12A, Industrial Area, Nanjangud – 571 301 Kolkata – 700 069. Mysore District, Karnataka, India "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaeca 2930 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Anup Sinha & Ms. Rituparna Sinha, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 37(1)Section 92C

…ibunal in the matter of DCIT vs. Isagro (Asia) Agrochemicals (P.) Ltd reported in [2013] 31 taxmann.com 388 (Mumbai - Trib.), wherein the Hon'ble Tribunal interalia held that : "various benches of the Tribunal including Asstt. CIT v. MSS India (P.) Ltd.[2009] 32 SOT 132 (Pune) and Philips Software Centre (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT ITA No.179/Kol/2016 A.Y 2011-12 [2008] 26 SOT 226 (Bang.) have preferred the following of CUP method. It is obvious that when the price of similar goods or services as sold or provided to the non-AEs is available, such a price constitutes the best guide to find out whether the price charge…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III vs. M/S TIMKEN ENGINEERING

ITA/253/2012HC Karnataka10 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260Section 260ASection 92

…1/11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2018 PRESENT THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON’BLE Mrs.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA I.T.A.Nos.253-254/2012 BETWEEN: 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III REVENUE BUILDINGS QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 12(3), BANGALORE. …APPELLANTS (By Mr. JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, ADV.) AND: M/S. TIMKEN ENGINEERING & RESEARCH INDIA PVT. LTD., Sy.No.(s), 39(P), 41(P), 42(P) ELECTRONIC CITY PHASE II DODDATHOGUR VILLAGE BEGUR HO…

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2