How many judgments cite CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd.?

422 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. (345 ITR 241), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 144C(13), Section 234B, Section 92CA, Section 144B, Section 92C.

CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd.

345 ITR 241High Court2012#172 most cited

What is CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. authority for?

Transfer pricing adjustments for outstanding receivables are permissible only if the Tax Officer establishes, through analysis over a period, a pattern indicating an international transaction intended to benefit an associated enterprise. The Tax Officer cannot question purely business decisions like royalty payments or exceed jurisdiction by applying cost-benefit analysis to determine the arm's length price of services.

422

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 370,744 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. · Section 92CA · outstanding receivables · interest on outstanding receivables · TPO jurisdiction · business decision · royalty payments · arm's length price · associated enterprise benefit · pattern of delay · intra-group services

Also reported as

24 Taxmann.com 199209 Taxmann 200250 CTR 264

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234B Section 92CA Section 144B Section 92C Section 234C Section 234D

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

intra group services interest on outstanding receivables cup method tested party far analysis working capital adjustment section 92b most appropriate method benchmarking analysis transactional net margin method comparable companies associated enterprises

Judgments citing CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd.

M/S. Philips India Limited (Formerly Philips Electronics India Litd.), Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 12(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as per the discussion made

ITA 2600/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2600/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) M/S Philips India Ltd. Vs. Acit, Circle-12(2), Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri P. J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Ketan V. Ved& Ms. PurbaFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 92C

…ples emanating out of those judgements and applied the same to the facts of the case in Bata India Ltd. In the said case (i.e Bata India Ltd supra) it was observed as under:- 27. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd.[2012] 345 ITR 241/24 taxmann.com 199/209 Taxman 200 as well as CIT v. Cushman & Wakefield (India) (P.) Ltd.[2014] 367 ITR 730/46 taxmann.com 317 (Delhi), rendered similar ruling as was rendered in the case of Dresser-Rand India (P.) Ltd. (supra). In the case M/s Philips India Ltd. (formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) SA No. 13/Kol/2019 (arising out of I.T.A.…

Cwt India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) RG 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2009-

ITA 1588/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Cwt India Private Limited, The Assistant Commissioner Of Unit No. 2, Raheja Centre, Income Tax-9(2)(2), Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Free Press Journal Marg, Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021 Pan : Aaaci7084H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Butani/For Respondent: Saurabh Deshpande /

Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…rred a particular expense or not. A business enterprise incurs the expenditure on the basis of what is commercially expedient and what is not commercially expedient. As held by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. [2012] 345 ITR 241/209 Taxman 200/24 taxmann.com 199 (Delhi), "Even Rule 10B(1)(a) does not authorize disallowance of any expenditure on the ground that it was not necessary or prudent for the assessee to have incurred the same". 16. The very foundation of the action of the TPO is thus devoid of legally sustainable merits. There is no dispute that the impugned paym…

M/S the Himalaya Drug Company, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is partly allowed

ITA 187/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Laliet Kumarit(Tp)A No.187/Bang/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri. Padam Chand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Susan D. George, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…of MSIL was found 'excessive' the Revenue deduced the existence of an international transaction. It then added back the excess expenditure as the transfer pricing 'adjustment'. This runs counter to legal position explained in CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd.(2012) 345 ITR 241 (Del), which required a TPO "to examine the IT(TP)A No.187/Bang/2015 Page 38 of 50 ‘international transaction’as he actually finds the same.” In other words the very existence of an international transaction cannot be a matter for inference or surmise.” At para 76 of its order, the Hon'ble High Court has held as under:- “ 76. As explained by th…

JCIT(OSD), New Delhi vs. M/S Advaqnce Surfactants India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2245/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Years: 2012-13 Jcit(Osd), Circle 1(2), Vs Advance Surfactants India Ltd., New Delhi. 511/2/1, Rajokari, New Delhi. Pan: Aabca9042Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Surender Pal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 10.04.2019 Order

Section 37(1)

…d the law laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs G4S Securities System, 338 ITR 46, CIT vs J.K. 3 Synthetics, 176 (2009) Taxman 355 (Del), Climate Systems India Ltd. vs CIT (2009) 319 ITR 113 (Del); and CIT vs EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) 345 ITR 241 and reached a conclusion that where the payment of royalty depended on the quantum of sale which would decrease or increase every year depending upon the decrease or increase in the sale, payment of royalty would be revenue expenditure. He, therefore, accordingly, granted relief to the assessee. 5. Revenue is, therefore, before us in this appeal…

Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circel-1, Vadodara

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 929/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin Shah, ArsFor Respondent: Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR

Section 92B

…the assessee to take commercial decisions and decide how to conduct and carry on its business. Actual business transactions that are legitimate cannot be restructured. A similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of EKL Appliances Ltd. 345 ITR 241. 9. On identical set of facts, the Co-ordinate Bench had the occasion to consider similar issue in the case of Cadila Healthcare Ltd. in ITA No. 2430/Ahd/12 with C.O. No. 242/Ahd/12 in 146 ITR 502 wherein the first ground related to the adjustment made on account of notional interest on Optionally Convertible Debenture to Foreign Subsidiary. The…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Baroda vs. M/S. Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited, Vadodara

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 922/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin Shah, ArsFor Respondent: Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR

Section 92B

Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1237/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin Shah, ArsFor Respondent: Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR

Section 92B

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Baroda vs. M/S. Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited, Vadodara

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1234/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin Shah, ArsFor Respondent: Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR

Section 92B

Parveen Industries (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi

In the result, ground of appeal raised by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6504/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2013-14 With S.A. No. 972/Del/2018 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6504/Del/2017] Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Parveen Industries (P.) Vs. Addl. Cit, Ltd., Special Range-7, New Delhi Plot No. 32, Phase-Ii, Badli Industrial Area, New Delhi Pan :Aaacp4029K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By S/Shri Gautam Jain, Lalit Mohan & Piyush Kamal, Advocates Respondent By Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Cit(Dr)

Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92CSection 92F

…no adjustment warranted i) ITA No.5872/M/2009, Indo American Jewellery Ltd., affirmed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Indo Americal Jewellery Ltd., in ITA No.1053/2012 ii) 388 ITR 510 (Bom.) CIT Vs. Goldstar Jewellery Design (P) Ltd. iii) 345 ITR 241 (Del.) CIT Vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. S.A. No.972/Del/2018 4.3 The ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the order of the TPO and DRP and submitted that delay of period of receivables in case of third-parties should be compared with the delay of the period with the AE. 4.4 We have heard the rival submission and perused the relevant material on record…

M/S Yakult Danone India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 996/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2011-12 Yakult Danone India P Ltd. D.C.I.T. Circle 27(1) 16, 1St Floor Vs. New Delhi Community Centre Okhla Industrial Area, Phase I New Delhi

Section 143Section 144CSection 92BSection 92CSection 92F

…f MSIL was found 'excessive' the Revenue deduced the existence of an international transaction. It then added back the excess expenditure as the transfer pricing 'adjustment'. This runs counter to legal position explained in] CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Del) which required a TPO "to examine the ‘international transaction’ as he actually finds the same.” In other words the very existence of an international transaction cannot be a matter for inference or surmise. 65. As already noticed, the decision in Sony Ericsson has done away with the BLT as means for determining the ALP of an international…

Woodward India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 916/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2009-10 Woodward India Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, (Formerly Known As Woodward Circle-18(1), Governor India Ltd.,), 12Th Floor, New Delhi. Vs Building No. 5, Dlf Cyber Terraces, Dlf Cyber City, Phase-Iii, Gurgaon-122002 Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vishal Kalra, Adv. Shri S.S. Tomer, Adv. Department By: Shri H.K. Choudary, C.I.T. Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.03.2019

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudary, C.I.T. DR

Section 92Section 92C

…hi High Court vide order dated March 3, 2017 (ITA 123/2017). SLP filed by the Reenue 16 | P a g e authorities has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated January 19, 2018 (SLP (civil) No. 41702/2017) • CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. [2012] 345 ITR 241 (Delhi) • COIM India Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT (ITA No. 7260/D/2017) (Delhi – Trib.) 3.19 The Ld. AR further submitted that the decision to enter into any transaction is Assessee’s commercial decision, and it is not open for the Revenue to question the commercial prudence. The Ld. AR submitted that the Revenue cannot sit and judge over the manner in whic…

Sabic Innovative Plastics India Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Baroda

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

ITA 2730/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92D

…ITA No.: 2730/Ahd/ 2017 Assessment year: 2013-14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar VP and Madhumita Roy JM] ITA No.: 2730/Ahd/ 2017 Assessment year: 2013-14 Sabic Innovative Plastics India Pvt Ltd …………...…………..Appellant Plastics Avenue, Jawharnagar 391 320 Vadodara District, Gujarat [PAN: AABCE7565N] Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1)(1), Vadodara ……………..…........Respondent Appearances by Manoj Pardasini and Miral Sangharajka for the assessee MSA Khan and Vinod Tanwani for the revenue Date of concluding the hearing : December 12…

Euroflex Transmission India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-17(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 2022/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2013-14 Euroflex Transmissions Vs. Asst Commissioner Of (India) Private Limited, Income Tax, Plot No. 99, Cie, Phase – Ii, Circle – 17(1), Gandhinagar, Balanagar, Hyderabad. Hyderabad.

For Appellant: Shri Raghunathan S, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai (DR)

Section 143(3)

…spect of the entire amount paid to the parent company for technical knowhow fees. The Tribunal at Para 24 of its order has dealt with the issue at length and following the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of EKL Appliances Ltd, reported in 345 ITR 241 (Del.) (H.C) held that without evaluation the ALP of a service, it is wholly irrelevant as to whether the assessee benefits from its order or not; the real question is as to whether price of this service is what an independent enterprise would have paid for the same. The Tribunal has also considered that the TPO therein has on the one hand, held…

Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 2(2), New Delhi

In the result, ITA NO. 7691/Del/2017 stands allowed

ITA 7691/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Tarundeep Singh & Tarun Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I.Bara, CIT-DR & Sh. Sandeep Kr

Section 144CSection 92BSection 92F

…omotion expenditure incurred as a transaction by itself when it has neither been identified as such by the assessee or legislatively recognised in the Explanation to section 92B runs counter to the legal position explained in CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. [2012] 345 ITR 241 (Delhi) which required a Transfer Pricing Officer 'to examine the "international transaction" as he actually finds the same'. In the present case, the mere fact that B&L, USA through B&L, South Asia, Inc. holds 99.9 per cent. of the share of the assessee will not ipso facto lead to the conclusion that the mere increasing of the advertisement, mar…

Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA NO. 7691/Del/2017 stands allowed

ITA 1811/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Tarundeep Singh & Tarun Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I.Bara, CIT-DR & Sh. Sandeep Kr

Section 144CSection 92BSection 92F

Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA NO. 7691/Del/2017 stands allowed

ITA 1662/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Tarundeep Singh & Tarun Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I.Bara, CIT-DR & Sh. Sandeep Kr

Section 144CSection 92BSection 92F

Teradata India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 4(1), Gurgaon

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8054/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Teradata India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, 301-302, 3Rd Floor, Tower-4A, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon S-Block, Dlf Corporate Park, Dlf City, Phase-Iii, Gurgaon, Haryana Pan :Aacct6715A (Appellant) (Respondent) & S.A. No.977/Del/2018 [Arising Out Of Ita No.8054/Del/2018] Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Teradata India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, 301-302, 3Rd Floor, Tower-4A, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon S-Block, Dlf Corporate Park, Dlf City, Phase-Iii, Gurgaon, Haryana Pan :Aacct6715A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Nageshwar Rao, Adv. Department By Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit(Dr)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: “I-2”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Teradata India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 301-302, 3rd Floor, Tower-4A, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon S-Block, DLF Corporate Park, DLF City, Phase-III, Gurgaon, Haryana PAN :AACCT6715A (Appellant) (Respondent) And S.A. No.977/Del/2018 [Arising out of ITA No.8054/Del/2018] Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Teradata India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 301-302, 3rd Floor, Tower-4A, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon S-Block, DLF Corporate Park, DLF City, Phase-III, Gurgaon, Haryana PA…

M/S. Lg Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., Gautam Buidh Nagar vs. ACIT, Noida

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

ITA 953/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10] Lg L.G Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The A.C.I.T Vs. No.51, Udyog Vihar, Circle -3 Plot Surajpur Kasna Road Noida Greater Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Pan No. Aaacl 1745Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 144C

…v. Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication (2015) 374 ITR 118 where the determination of the ALP of the royalty paid as Nil was not approved. The Court's attention has also been drawn to the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax v. EKL Appliances Limited (2012) 345 ITR 241 wherein it was held that Rule 10B (1) (a) did not authorize disallowance of any expenditure on the ground that it was not necessary for the Assessee to have incurred such expense. It was observed that though the quantum of expenditure could be examined, the entire expenditure could not be disallowed on the ground that it was not necessary.” 55.…

M/S Kanohar Electricals Ltd., Meerut vs. ACIT, Meerut

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5409/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri O.P. Meenaassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Kanohar Electricals Vs Acit, Central Circle -1, Ltd.,Rithani, Delhi Road, Meerut Meerut. Pan: Aaack7126N (Appellant) Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37

…e assessing officer disallowed the expenses was that the assessee did not get any export receipts during this financial year. The counsel submitted that in view of the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd 345 ITR 241 (Delhi) the assumption that the expenditure can only be justified if there is corresponding increase in the profit or if the export receipts are there is erroneous. Ld. Counsel has also filed additional evidence under Rule 29 of ITAT Rules in the shape of photo copies of ledger account, e-mails supporting the sourcing the business development. 5…

Terex Equipment Pvt. Ltd., Tamil Nadu vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4123/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT- DR

Section 143(3)

…rdingly, reflective of an arm’s length charge. 11. In so far as the observation of the TPO that the assessee has not been able to show as to what cost benefit analysis has been done by the assessee, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of EKL Appliances 345 ITR 241 has held as under: “14. On the submissions made by both the sides, the following substantial questions of law are framed: - ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of Section 92CA of the Act and Rule 10B(1)(a) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, the Tribunal was right in confi…