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 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 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.

Lokesh Kumar Aggarwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-45(5), Delhi

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1575/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 2Section 92C

…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).” 16.10. Thus, it is seen that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has observed iner-alia that in order to justify adjustments on the issue of receivables, the TPO has to establish a pattern wherein, the arrangement reflects an international transaction intended to benefit the associated enterprise in some way. Even though in th…

Otis Elevator Company (India) Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, 13(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 3337/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon'Bleι.Τ.Α. No. 3337/Mum/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora & Nikhil Tiwari, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali, Sr. D/R

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234ASection 234CSection 234FSection 270A(1)Section 37(1)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…assessee were dismissed by the DRP. 7. After giving a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below, at the very outset, it would be pertinent to refer to the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of the Delhi in the case of EKL Appliance Ltd. (345 ITR 241) (Delhi HC). The relevant findings read as under:- “The position emerging from the several 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 by him for the purpose of busi…

Aurobindo Pharma Limited (Auronext Pharma Private Limited Since Amalgamated With Aurobindo Pharma Limited), Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 893/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri B. G. Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri P.V. Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 92B

…ny 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)." 4.2.1 Similar view was taken by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Qualcomm India (P.) Ltd. 156 taxmann.com 288) (Delhi) that once impact of receivable on working capital is evaluated and consequent profitability/pricing is compared vis-a-vis draft comparables, there is no requirement of any further adjustment…

Benetton India P.Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 7315/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Benetton India Pvt.Ltd., Vs Acit, B-25, Infocity, Sector-34, Circle-4(2), Gurgaon-122002 (Haryana) New Delhi. Pan-Aaacd1013F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms. Suchita Kanodia, Ar, Ms. Nishitta Rai, Ar & Shri Ajit Jain, Ar Respondent By Shri Dharamvir Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 04.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07.11.2024 Order

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “I” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Benetton India Pvt.Ltd., vs ACIT, B-25, Infocity, Sector-34, Circle-4(2), Gurgaon-122002 (Haryana) New Delhi. PAN-AAACD1013F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Ms. Suchita Kanodia, AR, Ms. Nishitta Rai, AR and Shri Ajit Jain, AR Respondent by Shri Dharamvir Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing 04.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement 07.11.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM : This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15 is directed…

Toshiba Transmission and Distribution System (India) Private Limited, Rudraram vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-81), Hyderabad

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

ITA 103/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavआ.अपी.सं / Ita Tp No.103/Hyd/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Toshiba Transmission & Distribution Vs. Acit, Circle-8(1) Systems (India) Private Ltd. Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aaect6883F] अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Ms.Kranthi,Ar & Shri Kc Devdas, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri B.Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Ms.Kranthi,AR and Shri KC Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 195Section 40Section 92C

…the courts have time and again held that the TPO/DRP/A.O cannot disallow the genuine expenses on the ground that no benefits have been received by an assessee. A reference can be made to the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ekal Application 345 ITR 241(Del). So far as rendering of services from the parent company to the assessee is concerned, the assessee has simply filed some e-mail correspondence between the parent company and the assessee. In our view these e-mail correspondences are not enough to hold that the parent company had rendered technical services/assistance to the assessee. It is…

Kh Facility Solutions India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle--5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 201/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri H. Srinivasulu, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Ms. N. Swapna, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 270A

…can be made to the following judgements: ITA No.201/Hyd/2022 6 i) Baush and Lomb Eye Care India Pvt. Ltd. 381 ITR 227 (Del) ii) Whirlpool India 381 ITR 154 (Del) iii) Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India Pvt. Ltd. 374 ITR 118 (Del) iv) Ekal Applications 345 ITR 241 (Del) 8. In view of the above we allow the claim of the assessee and direct the AO to delete the addition. (Ground number 2 decided accordingly). 9. Ground No.3 relates to regional support services provided by the assessee. The learned counsel for the assessee has filed certain additional evidences to rebut the observations made by the Ld. DRP. T…

Comparex India P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 2151/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(10)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(8)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…Ld. TPO exceeded its jurisdiction by applying the cost benefit analysis in determining the ALP of intra group charges and also erred in not following the binding precedent laid down by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. EKL Appliances [2012] 345 ITR 241 (Delhi) B. Erroneous adjustment of INR 1,887,166 with respect to international transaction pertaining to Provision of back-office support services 7. On the facts and in law, the Revenue erred including selecting companies that are not comparable to the Appellant in terms of functions performed, assets employed, and risks assumed 8. On the facts…

Borgwarner Emissions Systems India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2015/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Narinder Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 92C

…o question the commercial wisdom of the assessee, the reason being 32 that it is for the assessee to take such decisions which favour the assessee in advancement of its business in this regard reliance has been placed on decision in CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd, 345 ITR 241(HC), Delhi. In this regard, it would be relevant here to refer to the findings recorded by Co-ordinate Bench of the Appellate Tribunal in the order passed in the first round. In the first round, it was observed by the Appellate Tribunal that in view of decision in Cushman’s case, Ld. TPO should have verified and examined the aspect of benefit and…

Gates India Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-10(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2379/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92CSection 92C(1)

…Cushman and Wakefield (India) Pvt. Ltd., 367 ITR 730 (Del) under the transfer pricing provision the TPO has computed the ALP of transaction and such transaction cannot be benchmarked unless the expenditure has been incurred as held in CIT vs. EKL Appliances, 345 ITR 241 (Del). The benefit test thus has no relevance. (xiii) In the case of sister concern of the assessee, namely, M/s. Gates Unitta (India) Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kanchipuram which is I.T.A. No.2379/Del/2022 11 in the same line of business and also have adopted the benchmarking of the intra-group services/transactions on cost based TNMM method which include…

Fare Portal India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-7(1), Delhi

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

ITA 497/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu S. SinhaFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Shah

Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92D

…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).” 35. The Order of Coordinate Bench in Bechtel India Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT (ITA No. 1478/Del/2015) (“Bechtel India”) has been upheld by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi. In Bechtel India (supra), the TPO has imputed interest on receivables treating the delayed payments as loan facility advanced to the AEs., which is apparent from the order of…

Benetton India P.Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

ITA 496/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 496/Del/2022 (A.Y 2017-18) Benetton India Pvt. Ltd., Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Plot No. 25B, Block Infocity Vs. Tax, Circle : 4 (2), Sector : 34, Gurugram, New Delhi. Haryana.Pan:Aaacd1013F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Deepak Chopra, H. S. Ajmani, Sh. Ankul Goel & Ms. Rashi Khanna, Advs Department By: Shri Mahesh Shah, [Cit] D.R. & Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, H. S. Ajmani, ShFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Shah

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

…expenditure and his jurisdiction extends only to benchmark the transaction in terms of mandate of Section 92(1) of the Act. The aforesaid proposition is well founded in light of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. 345 ITR 241. Therefore, in our view, the approach of the TPO, which has also been thereafter approved by the Ld. Benetton India P. Ltd., Gurgaon DRP is contrary to the legal as well as the factual position and the transfer pricing adjustment made thereupon, is unsustainable. We hold accordingly. IT Cost Allocation 27. The assessee claimed to have receiv…

ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi vs. Benetton India P.Ltd, Gurgaon

ITA 7389/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, H. S. Ajmani, ShFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Shah

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

The Dy. CIT., Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Invida India Pvt.Ltd. ( Now Known As Menarini India Pvt. Ltd.), Ahmedabad

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1316/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…ervices are rendered. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer/TPO cannot question the business decision of the assessee as to payment or hold that no service was rendered. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: a) CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. 345 ITR 241 (Del.) b) Cadbury India Ltd. vs. ACIT – 147 ITD 487 (Mum) A.Y. 2010-11 Page 9 of 13 The Ld. AR submitted that assessee has mentioned in the TP Study Report that the transaction in question is also comparable with the amount charged to other associates. Even otherwise, it is no possible for the parent company to fix margin for all associates in…

Alcatel Lucent India Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-15, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1447/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyaassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…ny further adjustment only on the basis of the outstanding receivables would have distorted the picture and re- characterized 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)”. 37. The principles which emerge from the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble High Court are as under: (1) Factors responsible for the delay have to be investigated on case to case basis. 20 & SA No.199/Del/2023 (2) Proper inquiry/examination has to be conducted by the TPO by analyzing the statistics over a period of time to…

Jubilant Pharmova Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. ACIT-1, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is partly allowed

ITA 526/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. K. M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT- DR

Section 143(3)Section 144B

…comparables, any further adjustment only on the basis of the outstanding receivables would have distorted the picture and re-characterized the transaction. This was clearly impermissible in law as explained by this Court in CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Delhi). 12. Consequently, the Court is unable to find any error in the impugned order of the ITAT giving rise to any substantial question of law for determination. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed." 13. Further reliance is placed by the ld. AR on the following decisions wherein similar observations were made:  Convergys India Services P…

Concentrix Daksh Services India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 485/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ankul Goyal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 92C

…ny further adjustment only on the basis of the outstanding receivables would have distorted the picture and re- characterized 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). (ii). From the perusal of the above, following facts emerge, which were considered to be relevant by the Hon'ble High Court for making adjustment on account of delayed receivables by the TPO on account of transaction incurred by Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. (1) The Hon'ble High Court has stated that factor responsible for the d…

Zydus Lifesciences Limited (Formerly Known As Cadila Healthcare Ltd.), Ahmedabad vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1884/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kambleassessment Year : 2015-16 Zydus Lifesciences Ltd. (Formerly Vs. The Dcit, Cir.1(1)(2) Known As Cadila Healthcare Ltd., Ahmedabad. 4Th Floor, D-Wing, Zydus Corporate Park, Scheme No.63, Survey No.536, Khoraj (Gandhinagar), Nr.Vaishnodvi Circle, Sg Highway, Ahmedabad Pan : Aaacc 6253 G (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Jigar Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29/11/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92B

…ave incurred 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 Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. [(2012) 345 ITR 241 (Del)] "Even Rule 10B(l)(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". The very foundation of the action of the TPO is thus devoid of legally sustainable merits. We have also noted that there is no mark up in the reimbursement of expenses, and,…

Michael Page International Recruitment Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 14(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1190/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Ms. A. Alankrutha, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…f any expenditure incurred by the assessee cannot be the basis for 8 Michael Page International Recruitment Pvt. Ltd. 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. 24. We further find that Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT v. Lever India Exports Ltd. [2017] 78 taxmann.com 88/246 Taxman 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…

Thomas Cook (India) Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl/ Jt/ Dy/CIT/Asstt/ITO, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 1218/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Ble

Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…ar as proper return on deemed advance is concerned and that substance over form, economic reality over legal form and conduct of parties over contracts have to be "looked through" c) Hon'ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd, 345 ITR 241 held that such re-characterization is possible in exceptional circumstances as under? “18. Two exceptions have been allowed to the aforesaid principle and they are (i) Where the economic substance of a transaction differs from its form; and (ii) Where the form and substance of the transaction are the same but arrangements made in relation to the…

Denso Haryana Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 10(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 3811/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. Brr Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Denso Haryana Pvt. Ltd., Versus Dcit, Circle 10(1), B-1/D-4, Ground Floor, Mohan New Delhi. Cooperative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, Badarpur, New Delhi. Pan:Aaacd6817F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Himanshu S. Sinha, Adv. Sh. Bhuwan Dhoopar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.11.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Himanshu S. Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 92B

…y the Appellant. The powers of the TPO are governed by Chapter X of the Act under which he can only make an adjustment to arrive at the arm’s length price of an international transaction. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v EKL Appliances [2012] 345 ITR 241(Para 22)has held that Rule 10B(1) of the Rules does not give TPO the power to disallow an expenditure on the ground that it was not necessary or prudent for the Appellant to have incurred the same. 6.9 Reliance is also placed on the following judgments as well: - Commissioner of Income Tax-I v. Cushman and Wakefield (India) (P.) Ltd. [2014] 46 ta…