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 368,382 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.

Future First Info Services Private Ltd., Delhi vs. AO Circle-7(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 672/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 92D

…Τ.Α No. 2222 & 2223/Kol/2010].  Sojitz India (P) Ltd. (I.T.A Nos.-5186/Del/2011 & 5433/Del/2012].  Cotton Naturals (I) Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 233/2014) (Delhi High Court),  Sony India (P) Ltd. (ITA No. 1189/Del/2005) Delhi ITAT,  EKS Appliances Limited (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Delhi High Court),  Li & Fung India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA 306/2012) Delhi ITAT. 4.1 The Ld. AR drew out attention to the Safe Harbour Rules [Rule-10 TA(e) of the Rules notified by CBDT] wherein the back-office operations, data processing and data mining and support centers had been characterized as ITeS. Thus, it was contended that the appellant asse…

Rubicon Research Limited (Formerly Known As Rubicon Research Private Limited), Thane, Maharashtra vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle 15(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6647/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.6647/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Rubicon Research V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Limited (Formerly बिधम Income Tax- Circle Known As Rubicon 15(3)(1), Mumbai Research Private Aaykar Bhavan, Maharshi Limited) Karve Road, New Marine Medone House, B-75, Lines, Churchgate, Mumbai Road No. 33, Wagle 400020 Estate, Thane 400604. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre Income Tax Department, Ministry Of Finance Delhi स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcr1422M Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri. Darpan Kirpalani रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri. Asif Karmali (Sr Dr)

For Appellant: Shri. Darpan KirpalaniFor Respondent: Shri. Asif Karmali (SR DR)

Section 143(3)Section 153Section 234BSection 37Section 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92D

…o. 6647/Mum/2024 AY 2021-22 Rubicon Research Limited (Formerly Known as Rubicon Research pvt ltd. disallowances under Section 37, which falls within the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer (AO). 4. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in EKL Appliances Ltd. v. CIT [345 ITR 241] clearly held that the TPO's jurisdiction is restricted to determining the ALP, and he cannot question the commercial expediency of transactions unless sham or bogus. 5. Therefore, the adhoc disallowance of 50% of the service charges on the basis of perceived benefit or sufficiency of evidence is beyond jurisdiction and is liable to be struck dow…

Suntec Business Solutions Private Limited, Chennai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai

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

ITA 3252/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri AR.V Sreenivasan, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…angalore - Trib) 5. Alternatively, it was submitted that the TPO/DRP is not justified in determining the ALP of cross charge as nil. In support of the alternative submission, the Ld.AR relied on the following case laws: i. EKL Appliances Ltd., 209 Taxman 200/345 ITR 241(Delhi) ii. Fosroc Chemicals India (P.) Ltd [2016] 69 taxmann.com 43 (Karnataka) iii. Tudor India (P.) Ltd., [2019] 111 taxmann.com 450 (Gujarat) 6. The other alternative contention raised by the Ld.AR was that the TPO/DRP has considered the salary cross charge both paid as well as received by the assessee company without netting off and same is…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1(1), Pune vs. M/S. IAC International Automotive India Pvt.Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 749/PUN/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Darpan KirpalaniFor Respondent: Shri Madhukar Anand

Section 143(2)Section 92Section 92C

…by delving into the question of whether services were actually received or whether any benefit accrued therefrom. This constitutes a clear usurpation of the role of the Assessing Officer (AO). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT e. EKL Appliances Ltd. ((2012) 345 ITR 241 (Del)) has unequivocally held that the TPO's role is confined to determining the ALP and not to assess the necessity or benefit of an expense from a business perspective. 4. The TPO's conclusion that the services received by the Appellant constitute "routine shareholder activities" is a finding based on conjecture, devoid of any objective economi…

Aristocrat Technologies India Private Limited, Noida vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1)(1), Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 3091/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.3091/िद"ी/2024(िन.व. 2020-21) Aristocrat Technologies India P. Ltd., 8Tgh To 10Th Floor, Tower-11A, Plot No. 20 & 21, Candor Techspace, It/Ites Sez Complex, Sector-135, Noida, Up 201304 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aahca-9200-G बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Circle-5(1)(1), Noida, Up Assessee By : Shri Atul Jain, Chartered Accountant Ms. Nishi Bhutani & Ms.Preeti Agnihotri, Chartered Accountants Department By : S/Shri S.K. Jhadav, Cit(Dr) & Rajesh Kumar Dhaneshta, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 04/04/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 03/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.05.2024 Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act,1961(Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). 2. The Facts Of The Case In Brief As Emanating From Records Are: The Assessee Is Engaged In Providing Design & Development Services To Its Associated Enterprises (Ae’S). The Assessee Is Also Rendering Global It Services To Its Ae’S

For Appellant: Shri Atul Jain, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: S/Shri S.K. Jhadav, CIT(DR) & Rajesh Kumar Dhaneshta, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 270A

…hat of its 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 345 ITR 241(Delhi).” In light of aforesaid decisions, we direct the AO/TPO to examine that if while making working capital adjustment outstanding receivable have been factored no separate adjustment is warranted for outstanding receivables as separate international transaction. 14. In ground no. 11 of appeal, the assessee has assailed levy of interest u/s. 2…

Vaibhav Global Limited, Jaipur vs. DCIT, CC-4, Jaipur

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

ITA 1144/JPR/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 115QSection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 36(1)(va)

…double taxation created where the arbitrary other tax administration does not share the same views as to how the transaction should be structured". - 3. In this regard, we place our reliance on the following case laws: - CIT v. EKL Appliances Limited (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Delhi HC): - "17. The significance of the aforesaid guidelines lies in the fact that they recognize that barring exceptional cases, the tax administration should not disregard the actual transaction or substitute other transactions for them and the examination of a controlled transaction, should ordinarily be based on the transaction as it h…

Ntt India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Asstt Comm. of Income Tax-14(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is accordingly partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2491/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanntt India Private Vs. Assessment Unit/Nfac/Dcit Limited Circle 15(1)(2), 1701-1704, B Wing, One Mumbai Bkc, Level 17, G-Block, Aayakar Bhavan, Plot No. C-65, Bandra Mumbai. Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400 051. Pan/Gir No. Aaacd2145G (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 271ASection 92C

…d exclusively for the purposes of the business" is a fact determination or verification and that exercise is to be undertaken by the A0. That determination is not and cannot be made by the TPO. The Hon 'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ekl Appliances Ltd. (345 ITR 241) has held as under: "It is not open to the Transfer Pricing Officer to question the judgment of the assessee as to how it should conduct its business and regarding the necessity or otherwise of incurring the expenditure in the interest of its business. t is entirely the choice of the assessee as to from whom it contemplates to source its technol…

Bostik India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Dc/ACIT Circle(2)(1)(1), Dc/ACIT Circle

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2472/BANG/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri Sumeet Khurana, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. K.J. Dhivya, D.R

Section 234A

…IT(TP)A No.2472/Bang/2024 Bostik India Private Limited, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.2472/Bang/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Bostik India Private Limited 124/1 & 124/2A, Kachanayakanahalli Behind Bommasandra Indl Area DC/ACIT Anekal Taluk Vs. Circle-2(1)(1) Bangalore 562 106 Bangalore Karnataka PAN NO : AABCB4627N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Sri Sumeet Khurana, A.R. Respondent by : Dr. K.J. Dhivya, D.R. Date of Hearing : 10.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 16…

Unilever India Exports Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax Central Circle - 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 4301/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Ms. Karishma Phatarphekar a/wFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Thakwani (SR DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 153Section 234CSection 270A

…f benefit to assessee or the commercial expediency of any expenditure incurred by the assessee cannot be the basis for disallowing the same, as held by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. [2012] 24 taxmann.com 199/209 Taxman 200/345 ITR 241. In our considered view, the assessee has been able to demonstrate, with substantial supporting material that it availed India specific services from its Head Office/Regional Office. The Ld. Transfer Pricing Officer in view has taken a rather restrictive view in coming to the conclusion that no services were rendered for which any independent thi…

Aquity Solutions India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 15(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4817/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Harsh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Ojha, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234ASection 234B

…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] 209 Taxman 200/345 ITR 241/345 ITR 241(Delhi).” 14. We find that similar findings were rendered by the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case in Aquity Solutions India (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT, reported in [2023] 147 taxmann.com 177 (Mumbai Trib.), for the assessment year 2017-18. 15. Thus, respectfully following the aforesaid decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Cou…

Mane India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 686/HYD/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 May 2025

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.686/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S Mane India (P) Ltd Vs. Acit Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Aaccm1243J Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate Mahima Goud राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. M. Narmada, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 06/05/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Advocate Mahima GoudFor Respondent: : Smt. M. Narmada, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…ollowing decisions and submitted that the TPO cannot determine the ALP at ‘Nil’ without conducting the proper exercises of determination of ALP by one of the prescribed methods. She has relied upon the following decisions: i) CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd(2012) 24 Taxmann.com 199 (Delhi) ii) CIT vs. Cushman & Wakefield India (P) Ltd (2014) 46 Taxmann.com 317 (Delhi). iii) CIT vs. Lever India Exports Ltd (2017) 78 Taxmann.com 88 (Bombay). iv) CIT vs. Johnson & Johnson Ltd (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 337 (Bombay). 5. The learned AR has then referred to the agreement between the assessee and the AE for management and techn…

American Express Banking Corporation (India Branch) vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

ITA/5/2025HC Delhi05 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 260ASection 92C

…ITA 5/2025 Page 1 of 14 $~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 05.05.2025 + ITA 5/2025 AMERICAN EXPRESS BANKING CORPORATION (INDIA BRANCH) .....Appellant Through: Mr Nageshwar Rao with Mr Pratik Rath, Advocates. versus ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr Anant Mann, JSC for Mr Ruchir Bhatia, SSC with Mr Abhishek Anand, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA VIBHU BAKHRU, J. (ORAL) 1. The appellant [Assessee] has filed the present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Ta…

Royal Canin India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mumbai

Appeal is hereby dismissed

ITA 6816/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shrivikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeroyal Canin India Pvt Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income- 1401 & 1402, F Wing, 14Th Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Floor, Lotus Corporate Park, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Cts No.185/A, Graham Firth Mumbai-400 020 Compound, Western Express Highway, Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400 063 Pan: Aadcr4417J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: ShriK.M. Gupta a/w Shri AnmolFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar (CIT DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRIVIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Royal Canin India Pvt Ltd vs Assistant Commissioner of Income- 1401 & 1402, F Wing, 14th tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Floor, Lotus Corporate Park, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, CTS No.185/A, Graham Firth Mumbai-400 020 Compound, Western Express Highway, Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400 063 PAN: AADCR4417J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : ShriK.M. Gupta a/w Shri Anmol Chhabra Respondent by : Shri Pankaj Kumar (CIT DR) Date of hearing : 24/04/2025 Date of pronouncement : 28/…

Fluor Daniel India P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range-3, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6581/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 271Section 92C

…ment only on the basis of the outstanding receivables would have distorted the picture and recharacterised the transaction. This was clearly impermissible in law as explained by this Court in CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. [2012] 24 taxmann.com 199/209 Taxman 200/345 ITR 241 (Delhi)." 28. Applying the legal perspectives delineated by the above decision of hon’ble Delhi Court, we find from the facts of the case that the TPO has not examined the issue of receivables thoroughly. As per the directives in the Kusum Healthcare (supra) case that TPO has to examine the issue on case to case basis and to analyse the statis…

Ariston Group India Private Limited, Pune vs. The Assessement Unit, Income Tax Department, NFAC and the DCIT, Circle 1(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1680/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1680/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Ariston Group India Private The Assessment Unit, Limited, Income Tax Department, 1St Floor, Office No.103, V National Faceless Mayfai Tower, Wakdewadi, S. Assessment Centre, Shivaji Nagar, Pune-411005. Delhi(“Nfac”), The Dcit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Pan: Aaoca7042D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Ketan Ved – Ar Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/04/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(3) Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 18.06.2024 For A.Y.2020- 21. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Ariston Group India Private Limited (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ariston India' Or 'The Appellant) Prefers An Appeal For The Assessment Year 2020-21 Against

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 37(1)Section 92C

…PUN/2024 [A] the Act. Further, accrual of benefit to assessee or the commercial expediency of any expenditure incurred by the assessee cannot be the basis for disallowing the same, as held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of EKL Appliances Ltd. [2012] 345 ITR 241 (Del.). 24. We further find that Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT v/s Lever India Exports Ltd. [2017] 246 Taxmann 133 (Bom.), observed as under: “7. We note that the Tribunal has recorded the fact that the respondent assessee has launched new products which involved huge advertisement expenditure. The sharing of such expenditure by the r…

Hammond Power Solutions Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle 2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 76/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri P.V.S.S. Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 92C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA-TP-No.76/Hyd/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Hammond Power Solutions Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Private Limited, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN : AABCP2097C. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri P.V.S.S. Prasad, C.A. Revenue by: Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR Date of hearing: 05/02/2025 Date of pronouncement: 09/04/2025 O R D E R PER MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, A.M.: This appeal is filed by Ha…

Royal Canin India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee Ground no

ITA 4546/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Gupta a/w Shri AnmolFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar (CIT DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)

…he jurisdiction vested under transfer pricing provisions to the TPO is only to find out whether the prices paid by the services are at Arm's Length Price or not, as held in Sony Ericson Mobile Communication vs. CIT, 374 ITR 118; CIT vs. EKL Appliances, (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Del) and many other decisions. We further note that Co-ordinate Bench in DCIT vs. Apollo Gleneagles Hospital Ltd., (2013) 150 taxmann.com 210 (Kol), it was held for the purposes of determination of analyzing the benefit test has no great relevance in TP analysis." The Ld. AR argued that DRP/Ld. AO/Ld. TPO by not identifying any comparable uncont…

PCIT-1, New Delhi vs. Beam Global Spirits & Wine (India)Pvt.Ltd

ITA/155/2022HC Delhi07 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 92BSection 92F

…ITA 155/2022 & 156/2022 Page 1 of 38 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: March 03, 2025 Judgment pronounced on March 07, 2025 + ITA 155/2022 PCIT-1, NEW DELHI .....Appellant Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC, Mr. Shivendra Singh, Adv. Versus BEAM GLOBAL SPIRITS & WINE (INDIA) PVT.LTD. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Deepak Chopra and Mr. Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Ms. Ashmita, Advs. + ITA 156/2022 PCIT-1, NEW DELHI ...…

PCIT-1, New Delhi vs. Beam Global Spirits & Wine (India) Pvt. Ltd

ITA/156/2022HC Delhi07 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 92BSection 92F

Vodafone Digilink Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee Ground Nos 9 & 10 is allowed

ITA 1169/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla/wShriFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsala Jha (PCIT)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 35ASection 36(1)(m)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43(1)

…th price is not arrived at by applying any of the methods provided for in section 92C which the TPO is mandated to do. 4. 14. Reliance in this regard is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v/s. EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Delhi) relevant extract of the said judgment is reproduced hereunder: "....... 21. The position emerging from the above decisions is that it is not necessary for the assessee to show that any legitimate expenditure incurred by him was also incurred out of necessity. It is also not necessary for the assessee to show that any expenditure incurred…