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 369,743 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 234BSection 92CASection 144BSection 92CSection 234CSection 234D
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

intra group servicesinterest on outstanding receivablescup methodtested partyfar analysisworking capital adjustmentsection 92bmost appropriate methodbenchmarking analysistransactional net margin methodcomparable companiesassociated enterprises

Judgments citing CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd.

DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S at & S Pvt. Ltd., Karnataka

In the result, all three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 515/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Sh. J.Sudhakar Reddy & Sh. A.T.Varkey

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C”, KOLKATA BEFORE SH. J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. A.T.VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.515/KOL/2016, 974 & 975/KOL/2017 [Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2009-10, 2010-11] DCIT, v s M/s. AT & S Pvt.Ltd., Circle-11(1), Aayakar 12A, Industrial Area, Nanjangud, Bhawan, P-7, Mysore, Karnataka-741251. Chowringhee Square, PAN-AAECA2930J Kolkata-700069. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh.G.Mallikarjuna, CIT & Sh. Sanjay Paul, Addl. CIT Sr. DR Respondent by Ms. Rituparna Sinha & Sh. Anup Sinha, AR Date of Hearing 07.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement 05.10.201…

Johnson and Johnson Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax-Ltu-1, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6142/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwaljohnson & Johnson Pvt. Ltd. 501, Arena Space, Off Jvlr Opp. Majas Bus Depot ……………. Appellant Jogeshwari (East), Mumbai 400 060 Pan – Aaacj0866E V/S Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Ltu–1, Mumbai Assesseeby : Shri Rajan R. Vora A/W Shri Pranay Gandhi & Shri Harshvardhan Aggarwal Revenue By : Shri Jayant Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rajan R. Vora a/wFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 153Section 92C

…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 „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…

M/S. Eaton Power Quality Private Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 1373/PUN/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Vishal KalraFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(3)

…he assessee and whether the same is at arm's length when compared with similar transactions undertaken by external entities or internal comparables. 4.11 Reliance is placed on the Delhi High Court decision, in the case of EKL Appliances Limited vs CIT: [2012] 345 ITR 241 (Delhi) wherein the Court, in the context of TP provisions, has held that it is not necessary for an assessee to show that any legitimate expenditure incurred by him was incurred out of necessity. Hon'ble Court further observed as under: "So long as the expenditure or payment has been demonstrated to have been incurred or laid out for the purpose…

M/S Eaton Power Quality P.Ltd., Pune vs. ACIT, Pune

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 119/PUN/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Vishal KalraFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(3)

…he assessee and whether the same is at arm's length when compared with similar transactions undertaken by external entities or internal comparables. 4.11 Reliance is placed on the Delhi High Court decision, in the case of EKL Appliances Limited vs CIT: [2012] 345 ITR 241 (Delhi) wherein the Court, in the context of TP provisions, has held that it is not necessary for an assessee to show that any legitimate expenditure incurred by him was incurred out of necessity. Hon'ble Court further observed as under: "So long as the expenditure or payment has been demonstrated to have been incurred or laid out for the purpose…

M/S Indian Explosives Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1957/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy& Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1957/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Indian Explosives Private Ltd.......................…..…….……………………………………………………..……Appellant 16C, Bepin Paul Road Kolkata – 700 026 [Pan: Aaaci 6548 N] Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Kolkata..……….….….……………….......Respondent Appearances By: Miss Oindrila Bala & Shri Saurabh Kedia, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. Cit, Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 24Th,2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 7Th,2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer, Dt. 26/07/2017, Passed U/S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Facts In Brief:-

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 192CSection 40A(9)Section 92C(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member& Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 1957/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Indian Explosives Private Ltd.......................…..…….……………………………………………………..……Appellant 16C, Bepin Paul Road Kolkata – 700 026 [PAN: AAACI 6548 N] Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Kolkata..……….….….……………….......Respondent Appearances by: Miss Oindrila Bala & Shri Saurabh Kedia, A/R, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. CIT, DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Da…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gillette Diversified Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the department stands dismissed

ITA 5736/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Dinodia, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…s comparables, any further adjustment only on the basis of the outstanding receivables would have distorted the picture and recharactersied the transaction. This was clearly impermissible in law as explained by this Court in CIT Vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Delhi) — 2012- TII-01 -HXC-Del-TP.” 6.1 Thus, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held the delay in collection of monies even beyond the agreed period will have to be Assessment year 2008-09 to 2010-11 investigated on a case to case basis. It has also been laid down that the TPO will have to make a proper enquiry to discern a pattern which could…

M/S. Gillette Diversified Operations Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the department stands dismissed

ITA 5677/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Dinodia, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…s comparables, any further adjustment only on the basis of the outstanding receivables would have distorted the picture and recharactersied the transaction. This was clearly impermissible in law as explained by this Court in CIT Vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Delhi) — 2012- TII-01 -HXC-Del-TP.” 6.1 Thus, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held the delay in collection of monies even beyond the agreed period will have to be Assessment year 2008-09 to 2010-11 investigated on a case to case basis. It has also been laid down that the TPO will have to make a proper enquiry to discern a pattern which could…

M/S. Gillette Diversified Operations Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the department stands dismissed

ITA 5676/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Dinodia, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…s comparables, any further adjustment only on the basis of the outstanding receivables would have distorted the picture and recharactersied the transaction. This was clearly impermissible in law as explained by this Court in CIT Vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Delhi) — 2012- TII-01 -HXC-Del-TP.” 6.1 Thus, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held the delay in collection of monies even beyond the agreed period will have to be Assessment year 2008-09 to 2010-11 investigated on a case to case basis. It has also been laid down that the TPO will have to make a proper enquiry to discern a pattern which could…

M/S. Gillette Diversified Operations Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the department stands dismissed

ITA 5675/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Dinodia, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…s comparables, any further adjustment only on the basis of the outstanding receivables would have distorted the picture and recharactersied the transaction. This was clearly impermissible in law as explained by this Court in CIT Vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Delhi) — 2012- TII-01 -HXC-Del-TP.” 6.1 Thus, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held the delay in collection of monies even beyond the agreed period will have to be Assessment year 2008-09 to 2010-11 investigated on a case to case basis. It has also been laid down that the TPO will have to make a proper enquiry to discern a pattern which could…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Globe Ground India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 2785/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Us Is An Indian Company, In Which 51% Equity Is Held By A German Company By The Name Of Globe Ground Deutschland Gmbh & The Remaining 49% Equity Is Held By An Indian Resident Individual In The Name Of Radha Bhatia. The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Providing Ground & Passenger Handling Services To Airlines. The International Transactions Entered Into By The Assessee With Its Associated Enterprises Were

Section 143(3)

…ITA Nos. 2785/Del/14 Assessment year: 2005-06 Page 1 of 8 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI I-2 BENCH, NEW DELHI [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and Sudhanshu Srivastava JM] ITA No. 2785/Del/14 Assessment year: 2005-06 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Ward 12 (1), New Delhi ………….……....Appellant Vs Globe Ground India Pvt Ltd ……………........Respondent E-9, Connaught House Connaught Place, New Delhi 110 001 [PAN: AAACG 8313 K] Appearances by Sanjay Kumar Yadav for the appellant Tarandeep Singh and Tarun Singh for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : May 24, 2018 Date of pronouncing the order : Aug…

M/S Indian Explosives Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata

ITA 2336/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri S.S. Godara& Sri M. Balaganesh] I.T.A. No. 2336/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Indian Explosives P. Ltd..................................…..…….……………………………………………………..……Appellant 16C, Bepin Paul Road Kolkata – 700 026 [Pan: Aaaci 6548 N]

Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 92C(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Sri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member& Sri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member] I.T.A. No. 2336/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Indian Explosives P. Ltd..................................…..…….……………………………………………………..……Appellant 16C, Bepin Paul Road Kolkata – 700 026 [PAN: AAACI 6548 N] Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Kolkata..……….….….……………….......Respondent Appearances by: Shri Rahul Agarwal, CA, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT, DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing…

Indian Explosives Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. The JCIT, R-11, Kolkata

Appeals are partly allowed

ITA 85/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jun 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Years : 2010-11 Indian Explosives Limited Vs D.C.I.T. Circle-11(1), Kolkata 16C, Bepin Paul Road Kolkata – 700 026 (Pan: Aaaci 6548 N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2011-12 Indian Explosives Limited Vs J.C.I.T. Range-11, Kolkata 16C, Bepin Paul Road Kolkata – 700 026 (Pan: Aaaci 6548 N) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Sharma, ARFor Respondent: G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…ITA No.418/Kol/2015 & ITA No. 85/Kol/2016 Indian Explosives Pvt. Ltd. A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘C’ KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri S.S.Godara, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] Assessment years : 2010-11 Indian Explosives Limited Vs D.C.I.T. Circle-11(1), Kolkata 16C, Bepin Paul Road Kolkata – 700 026 (PAN: AAACI 6548 N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2011-12 Indian Explosives Limited Vs J.C.I.T. Range-11, Kolkata 16C, Bepin Paul Road Kolkata – 700 026 (PAN: AAACI 6548 N) (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant: Shri Ravi Sharma, AR For the Respondent: G. Malli…

Indian Explosives Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata

Appeals are partly allowed

ITA 418/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jun 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Years : 2010-11 Indian Explosives Limited Vs D.C.I.T. Circle-11(1), Kolkata 16C, Bepin Paul Road Kolkata – 700 026 (Pan: Aaaci 6548 N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2011-12 Indian Explosives Limited Vs J.C.I.T. Range-11, Kolkata 16C, Bepin Paul Road Kolkata – 700 026 (Pan: Aaaci 6548 N) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Sharma, ARFor Respondent: G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…ITA No.418/Kol/2015 & ITA No. 85/Kol/2016 Indian Explosives Pvt. Ltd. A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘C’ KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri S.S.Godara, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] Assessment years : 2010-11 Indian Explosives Limited Vs D.C.I.T. Circle-11(1), Kolkata 16C, Bepin Paul Road Kolkata – 700 026 (PAN: AAACI 6548 N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2011-12 Indian Explosives Limited Vs J.C.I.T. Range-11, Kolkata 16C, Bepin Paul Road Kolkata – 700 026 (PAN: AAACI 6548 N) (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant: Shri Ravi Sharma, AR For the Respondent: G. Malli…

M/S Jamna Auto Industries Ltd., Yamunanagar vs. ITO, Yamunanagar

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

ITA 856/CHANDI/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2009-10 The Dcit, Vs. Jamna Auto Industries Ltd., Yamuna Nagar Circle, Jai Spring Road, Yamuna Nagar. Industrial Area, Yamuna Nagar. Pan No. : Aaacj3929N & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Jamna Auto Industries Ltd., Vs The Ito, Jai Spring Road, Ward – 4, Industrial Area, Yamuna Nagar, Yamuna Nagar. Pan No. : Aaacj3929N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Sapra &For Respondent: Shri Ashish Gupta, CIT-DR

…nd not of the Revenue. It is not for the Revenue Authorities to dictate to the Assessee as to how he should conduct his business and it is not for them to tell the Assessee as to what expenditure the assessee can incur. He relied on the following judgments: • 345 ITR 241, CIT Vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. (Delhi High Court), copy attached as Annexure-I which relied on the following judgments (kindly refer to pages 20-25 of such judgment): • 20 ITR 1, Eastern Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT (Supreme Court) • 65 ITR 381, CIT Vs. Walchand & Co. etc. (Supreme Court) • 115 ITR 519, CIT Vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (Supreme Court) 12.…

DCIT, Yamunanagar vs. M/S Jamna Auto Industries Ltd., Yamunanagar

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

ITA 836/CHANDI/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2009-10 The Dcit, Vs. Jamna Auto Industries Ltd., Yamuna Nagar Circle, Jai Spring Road, Yamuna Nagar. Industrial Area, Yamuna Nagar. Pan No. : Aaacj3929N & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Jamna Auto Industries Ltd., Vs The Ito, Jai Spring Road, Ward – 4, Industrial Area, Yamuna Nagar, Yamuna Nagar. Pan No. : Aaacj3929N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Sapra &For Respondent: Shri Ashish Gupta, CIT-DR

…nd not of the Revenue. It is not for the Revenue Authorities to dictate to the Assessee as to how he should conduct his business and it is not for them to tell the Assessee as to what expenditure the assessee can incur. He relied on the following judgments: • 345 ITR 241, CIT Vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. (Delhi High Court), copy attached as Annexure-I which relied on the following judgments (kindly refer to pages 20-25 of such judgment): • 20 ITR 1, Eastern Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT (Supreme Court) • 65 ITR 381, CIT Vs. Walchand & Co. etc. (Supreme Court) • 115 ITR 519, CIT Vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (Supreme Court) 12.…

Efacec Switchgear India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 8(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7817/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleefacec Switchgear India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit 4Th Floor, Rectangle-1, Commercial Circle-8(1) Complex, D-4, District Centre, Saket, C. R. Building, I. P. Estate, New Delhi Aacce0747K New Delhi (Appelant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 144CSection 271(1)Section 92C

…s comparables, any further adjustment only on the basis of the outstanding receivables would have distorted the picture and re-characterised the transaction. This was clearly impermissible in law as explained by this Court in CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Delhi).” The Ld. AR also pointed out that it has taken the effect of receivables & payables while computing the working capital adjustment and calculated the margins accordingly. This decision has been followed recently by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Avenue Asia Advisors (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT [2017] 85 taxmann.com 311 (Delhi). Witho…

M/S. Aramex India P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT RG. 9(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 6749/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm M/S. Aramex India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit Rg. 9(1)(2) 821, Solitaire Corporate Park, Mumbai Andheri-Ghatkopar Link Road, Chakala- Andheri (E),Mumbai – 400 093 Pan/Gir No.Aacca6756A Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…he taxpayer should continue its business. In support of the above, reliance can be placed on the following decisions:-  CIT vs WatehandandCo. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC)  CIT vs Dafcrma Cement Pvt Ltd [2002] 254 ITR 377 (Delhi)  CIT vs EKL Appfcances Ltd [2012] 345 ITR 241(Delhi) 51. In view of the above, the segmental accounts maintained by the assessee should be accepted. Consequently, benchmarking analysis undertaken by the assessee should not be rejected by the AO / TPO. 52. Even if the segmental accounts of the assessee are rejected and entity wide margins are considered, the adjustment should be restricted t…

Bonfiglioli Transmission Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 2977/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S.Jayaraman

For Appellant: Mr.Sriram Seshadri &For Respondent: Mr.Vijayakumar Purna,JCIT, D.R
Section 143(3)

…submission that these were aggregated amounts payable by the assessee in respect of expenditure incurred by the parent company. The ld.A.R drew our attention to the decision of :- 11 -: Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd., (345 ITR 241) wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court had held as follows:- “22. Even rule 10B(1)(a) does not authorise disallowance of any expenditure on the ground that it was not necessary or prudent for the assessee to have incurred the same or that in the view of the Revenue the expenditure was unremunerative or that in view of the continued losses suffere…

At&S India Private Limited vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-11(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 77/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.77/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) At & S India (P) Ltd. Vs. D.C.I.T, Circle-11(1), Kolkata

For Appellant: Smt. Rituparna Sinha, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 37Section 92C

…of the nature of stewardship nature. The TPO is well within his statutory domain to determine ALP for the intra group services rendered apparently per force to the assessee. Hon'ble Delhi High court has held in EKL Appliances ([2012] 24 Taxmann.com 199 Delhi/ 345 ITR 241 Delhi): AT & S India (P) Ltd. Assessment Year: 2012-13 22. 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 or that in the view of the Revenue the expenditure was un-remunerative or that in view of the continued losses suffered by…

M/S Ther Structural Waterproofing Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-10(2), Kol, Kolkata

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

ITA 112/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.112/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Chryso India Private Vs. A.C.I.T, Circle-10(2), Kolkata Limited (Formerly Known As ‘The Structural Waterproofing Company Private Limited’) Plot No.D-30/7, Ttc Industrial Area, Aayakar Bhavan, P-7, Chowringhee M.I.D.C, Turbhe, Navi Square, Kolkata – 700 069. Mumbai-400 705 (Maharashtra) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aabct 0878 M (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 271(1)(c)Section 92C

…re the ITAT in Dresser Rand India P Ltd (47 SOT 423 [Mumbai] 2012), Knorr Bremse India P Limited (ITA no. 5097/Del/2011 - Asstt. Yr: 2007-08). Hon'ble Delhi High Court had the occasion to elucidate the issue in EKL Appliances ([2012] 24 Taxmann.com 199 Delhi/ 345 ITR 241 Delhi), specific findings in para 22 of the orderare – ‘22. Even Rule 10B(1)(a) does not authorize disallowance of any expenditure on the ground that it was not necessary or prudent Chryso India Private Limited Assessment Year: 2012-13 for the assessee to have incurred the same or that in the view of the Revenue the expenditure was unremunerativ…