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.

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 241)

Infor (India) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 193/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita-Tp No. 193/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Infor (India) Private Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Hyderabad Of Income Tax, [Pan No. Aaacb6197Q] Circle-2(1), Hyderabad अपीलार्थीर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Moti Lala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 260

…/Hyd/2023 S.A.No. 58/Hyd/2023 market rate(s) in issue. And also that they have wrongly applied benefit test as well which is not sustainable in light of CIT Vs. Cushman & Wakefield (India) Pvt. Ltd., [269 CTR 16] (Del) and CIT Vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) [345 ITR 241] (Del) that it is not within the TPO's domain to ascertain or apply the "benefit" test since the same has to be ascertained from the point of view of an assessee than questioning its wisdom by departmental authorities. His next argument is that it is the assessee's AE had in fact made the impugned payments to M/s.KPMG on "cost to cost basis" only…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-7 Delhi vs. Qualcomm India Pvt Ltd

ITA - 586 / 2023HC Delhi18 Oct 2023

…omparables, 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). 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.” [Emphasis is ours] 24. Thus, for the foregoing reasons, we are of the view that no interference with the impugned order is called…

Teradata India Pvt Ltd, Grugram vs. DCIT Circle-3(1), Gurugram

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

ITA 2337/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 80G

…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).” ITA Nos. 1248 & 2337/Del/2022 (A) ITA Nos. 1430/Del/2022 (R) Teradata India Pvt. Ltd 11. From the perusal of the aforesaid decision, we find that Hon’ble High Court noted that there has to be a proper inquiry by the ld TPO by analyzing the statistics over a period of time to discern a pattern which would indicate that vis-a-vis the rec…

ACIT-Circle-3(1), Gurgaon vs. Teradata India Private Limited, Gurgaon

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

ITA 1430/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 80G

…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).” ITA Nos. 1248 & 2337/Del/2022 (A) ITA Nos. 1430/Del/2022 (R) Teradata India Pvt. Ltd 11. From the perusal of the aforesaid decision, we find that Hon’ble High Court noted that there has to be a proper inquiry by the ld TPO by analyzing the statistics over a period of time to discern a pattern which would indicate that vis-a-vis the rec…

Teradata India P.Ltd, Gurugram vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Gurugram

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

ITA 1248/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 80G

…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).” ITA Nos. 1248 & 2337/Del/2022 (A) ITA Nos. 1430/Del/2022 (R) Teradata India Pvt. Ltd 11. From the perusal of the aforesaid decision, we find that Hon’ble High Court noted that there has to be a proper inquiry by the ld TPO by analyzing the statistics over a period of time to discern a pattern which would indicate that vis-a-vis the rec…

Gurner India Private Ltd., Delhi vs. Circle 10(2), Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 796/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 796/Del/2022, A.Y. 2017-18 M/S. Gurner India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. National Faceless Assessmetn 714, International Trade Centre, Tower, Nehru Place, New Delhi Delhi-110019 Pan : Aadcg2938H (Appellant) (Respondent)

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘I’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 796/Del/2022, A.Y. 2017-18 M/s. Gurner India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. National Faceless Assessmetn 714, International Trade Centre, Tower, Nehru Place, New Delhi Delhi-110019 PAN : AADCG2938H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Mr. Pancham Sethi, CA Respondent by Shri Manvendra Goyal, CIT(DR) Date of hearing: 27.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 10.10.2023 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: The appellant/ assessee has come in appeal challenging the final assessme…

Ntt India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/ACIT/Tax/ITO, Delhi

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

ITA 722/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Ntt India Pvt. Ltd. Addl/Jt/Dy./Acit/Tax/Ito 1701-1704, B-Wing, One Bkc Level, National Faceless Assessment Centre 17 G Block, Plot No. C-65, Vs. Delhi Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaacd 2145 G (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta : Shri Sunil A Umap & Revenue By Shri Samuel Pitta Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2023 : 04.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta

Section 143(3)

…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 technolo…

M/S. United Breweries Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 308/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ankur Pai, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Saravanan B., DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 14ASection 250Section 92C

…IT(TP)A No.345/Bang/2021 & M/s. United Breweries Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.345/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s. United Breweries Limited UB City, UB Tower, Level 4 JCIT No.24, Vittal Mallya Road Special Range-7 Vs. Bangalore 560 001 Bangalore PAN NO : AAACU6053C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. United Breweries Limited UB City, UB Tower, Level 4 No.24, Vittal Mallya Road DCIT Vs. Bangalore 560 001 Circle-7(1)(1) Bangalore PAN NO : AAACU6…

United Breweries Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range- 7, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 345/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ankur Pai, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Saravanan B., DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 14ASection 250Section 92C

…IT(TP)A No.345/Bang/2021 & M/s. United Breweries Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.345/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s. United Breweries Limited UB City, UB Tower, Level 4 JCIT No.24, Vittal Mallya Road Special Range-7 Vs. Bangalore 560 001 Bangalore PAN NO : AAACU6053C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. United Breweries Limited UB City, UB Tower, Level 4 No.24, Vittal Mallya Road DCIT Vs. Bangalore 560 001 Circle-7(1)(1) Bangalore PAN NO : AAACU6…

Phoenix Lamps Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, Noida

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

ITA 1152/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year 2012-13 Phoenix Lamps Ltd. Vs Dcit, (Formerly Known As Halonix Ltd.), Circle-2, 59-A, Nsez Phase Ii, Noida. Noida. Pan: Aabcp7718G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Shashwat Bajpai, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manu Chaurasia, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2023 Order Per M. Balaganesh, Am: These Appeals In Ita No.1702/Del/2016 For Ay 2011-12 & In Ita No.1152/Del/2017 For Ay 2012-13 Arise Out Of The Order Ld. Assessing Officer, Circle-2, Noida (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Ao’) Passed U/S 144C R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 12.02.2016. Ita No.1152/Del/2017 2. Identical Issues Are Involved In Both These Appeals, Hence, They Are Taken Up Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. Let Us Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1702/Del/2016 For Ay 2011-12 First.

For Appellant: Dr. Shashwat Bajpai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manu Chaurasia, Sr. DR

Section 144CSection 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).” 14. From the perusal of the aforesaid decision, it is amply clear that the assessee is duty-bound to prove before the ld. TPO, the pattern of realization of export proceeds from its AEs in the past as well as in the subsequent years. In the instant case, the assessee had merely given the bill wise outstanding details from AEs together…

Phoenix Lamps Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, Noida

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

ITA 1702/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year 2012-13 Phoenix Lamps Ltd. Vs Dcit, (Formerly Known As Halonix Ltd.), Circle-2, 59-A, Nsez Phase Ii, Noida. Noida. Pan: Aabcp7718G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Shashwat Bajpai, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manu Chaurasia, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2023 Order Per M. Balaganesh, Am: These Appeals In Ita No.1702/Del/2016 For Ay 2011-12 & In Ita No.1152/Del/2017 For Ay 2012-13 Arise Out Of The Order Ld. Assessing Officer, Circle-2, Noida (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Ao’) Passed U/S 144C R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 12.02.2016. Ita No.1152/Del/2017 2. Identical Issues Are Involved In Both These Appeals, Hence, They Are Taken Up Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. Let Us Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1702/Del/2016 For Ay 2011-12 First.

For Appellant: Dr. Shashwat Bajpai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manu Chaurasia, Sr. DR

Section 144CSection 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).” 14. From the perusal of the aforesaid decision, it is amply clear that the assessee is duty-bound to prove before the ld. TPO, the pattern of realization of export proceeds from its AEs in the past as well as in the subsequent years. In the instant case, the assessee had merely given the bill wise outstanding details from AEs together…

Menzies Bobba Ground Handling Services P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Cirlce-16(2), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 864/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Darpan Kirpalani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR

…nor the learned CIT(A) doubted either the actual rendition of services rendered by the AE or the utility of such services to the assessee. To this fact situation, the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd., (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Del), is applicable on all fours and for the sake of ready reference, we deem it just an appropriate to extract the relevant portion here under,- Page 4 of 10 ITA Nos. 863 & 864/Hyd/2016 “20. In the case of Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC), the Supreme Court referred to the legislative history and noted that wh…

Menzies Bobba Ground Handling Services P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Cirlce-16(2), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 863/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Darpan Kirpalani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR

…nor the learned CIT(A) doubted either the actual rendition of services rendered by the AE or the utility of such services to the assessee. To this fact situation, the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd., (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Del), is applicable on all fours and for the sake of ready reference, we deem it just an appropriate to extract the relevant portion here under,- Page 4 of 10 ITA Nos. 863 & 864/Hyd/2016 “20. In the case of Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC), the Supreme Court referred to the legislative history and noted that wh…

Gbt India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, OSD, Delhi

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

ITA 1763/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu S. Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Kumar, CIT DR

Section 43BSection 92C

…urisdiction by applying the cost benefit analysis in determining the ALP of Forward Transition Support Service 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 [2012J 345 ITR 241 (Delhi), wherein it has been held that TPO has no power to disallow an expenditure merely on the ground that it was not prudent for the Appellant to have incurred the same. 11. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble DRP/Ld. AO/ Ld. TPO erred in disregarding the fact that the disallowance of such costs would have…

Gruner India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 10(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4062/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 4062/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 M/S Gruner India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 15 Dsidc, Okhla Industrial Area, Circle-10(2), Phase-Ii, Scheme-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcg2938H Assessee By : Sh. Pancham Sethi, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Mrinal Kumar Das, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.07.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated Xx.02.2019 Passed By The Ao U/S 254/143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee:

For Appellant: Sh. Pancham Sethi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Mrinal Kumar Das, Sr. DR

Section 234BSection 254Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C

…ee's case. The matter, in case of Magne Marelli, related to payment of technical assistance fee. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Magneti Marelli (supra), also considered the decisions rendered by the Hon'ble High Court in case of EKL Appliances Ltd (2012) 345 ITR 241, Sony (2015) 374 ITR 118 and Denso India Ltd (2016) 240 Taxman 713. Upholding the ITAT decision in this case on the issue of payment of technical assistance fee Hon’ble High Court held that the payment to AE cannot be justified merely by explaining the necessity, relying on profits at entity level. Relevant paragraph of the Hon'ble High Court's o…

Intimate Fashions (India) Pvt. Ltd., Kanchipuram vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in IT (TP) A No

ITA 2725/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleit (Tp) A No.48/Chny/2019 It (Tp) A No.54/Chny/2018 & िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2011-12, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Intimate Fashions (India)- V. The Dcit / Jcit, Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Circle-2(2), 517-519, Chennai. Tirupporur Kottamedu High Road, Nandhivaram Village, Guduvancheri-603 202. Kanchipuram District.

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…O/TPO accepted the fact that AEs have provided services, then, the TPO cannot question the necessity of such services and in this regard, he relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. M/s.EKL appliances reported in [2012] 345 ITR 241. He further submitted that the JV was formed by three independent parties. IT (TP) A No.48/Chny/2019 IT (TP) A No.54/Chny/2018 & :: 9 :: Accordingly, it must be appreciated that no independent JV partner will allow to pay agency commission to one of the JV partners without actual benefit arriving to the JV. He further submitted that the AO/TP…

Intimate Fashions (India) Pvt. Ltd., Kancheepuram vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in IT (TP) A No

ITA 802/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleit (Tp) A No.48/Chny/2019 It (Tp) A No.54/Chny/2018 & िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2011-12, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Intimate Fashions (India)- V. The Dcit / Jcit, Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Circle-2(2), 517-519, Chennai. Tirupporur Kottamedu High Road, Nandhivaram Village, Guduvancheri-603 202. Kanchipuram District.

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…O/TPO accepted the fact that AEs have provided services, then, the TPO cannot question the necessity of such services and in this regard, he relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. M/s.EKL appliances reported in [2012] 345 ITR 241. He further submitted that the JV was formed by three independent parties. IT (TP) A No.48/Chny/2019 IT (TP) A No.54/Chny/2018 & :: 9 :: Accordingly, it must be appreciated that no independent JV partner will allow to pay agency commission to one of the JV partners without actual benefit arriving to the JV. He further submitted that the AO/TP…

Orange Business Services India Solutions Private Limited (Formerly Known As Equant Solutions India Private Limited), Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1), Gurgaon

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

ITA 2026/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Rishabh Malhotra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)

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

…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 the court in CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) 345 ITR 241(Del).” 14. The ld. DR pointed out that the Revenue has preferred SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the judgment of the Honble High Court of Delhi. In our understanding, since the operation of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court is not stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the same is binding on us and, therefore, respectfully followi…

M/S. United Breweries Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range-7, Bangalore

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

ITA 2532/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ankur Pai for Shri K.R. VasudevanFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 37Section 92C

…IT(TP)A No.2532/Bang/2019 United Brewries Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.2532/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 United Brewries Ltd. UB City, UB Tower, Level 4 No.24, Vittal Mallya Road JCIT Bangalore 560 001 Vs. Special Range-7 Karnataka Bangalore PAN NO : AAACU6053C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Ankur Pai for Shri K.R. Vasudevan, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R. Date of Hearing : 17.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 19.05.2023 O R D E R…

Kalburgi Cement Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT Circle -2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 573/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Sri Kalyanasundaram, C.AFor Respondent: Sri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 270ASection 92C

…d by the TPO for determining ALP at 'nil'. The law is now quite well settled that it is beyond the scope and powers of the AO/TPO to question the necessity of incurring expenditure. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. [2012] 345 ITR 241/209 Taxman 200/24 taxmann.com 199, after considering the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Walchand & Co. (P.) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC), Sassoon J. David & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 118 ITR 261/1 Taxman 485 (SC) held that the TPO cannot determine ALP at nil by holding that there was no need to incur such expenditure. While com…

CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd.

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

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd.

Infor (India) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-7 Delhi vs. Qualcomm India Pvt Ltd

Teradata India Pvt Ltd, Grugram vs. DCIT Circle-3(1), Gurugram

ACIT-Circle-3(1), Gurgaon vs. Teradata India Private Limited, Gurgaon

Teradata India P.Ltd, Gurugram vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Gurugram

Gurner India Private Ltd., Delhi vs. Circle 10(2), Delhi

Ntt India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/ACIT/Tax/ITO, Delhi

M/S. United Breweries Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7(1)(1), Bangalore

United Breweries Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range- 7, Bangalore

Phoenix Lamps Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, Noida

Phoenix Lamps Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, Noida

Menzies Bobba Ground Handling Services P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Cirlce-16(2), Hyd, Hyderabad

Menzies Bobba Ground Handling Services P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Cirlce-16(2), Hyd, Hyderabad

Gbt India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, OSD, Delhi

Gruner India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 10(2), New Delhi

Intimate Fashions (India) Pvt. Ltd., Kanchipuram vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai

Intimate Fashions (India) Pvt. Ltd., Kancheepuram vs. DCIT, Chennai

Orange Business Services India Solutions Private Limited (Formerly Known As Equant Solutions India Private Limited), Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1), Gurgaon

M/S. United Breweries Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range-7, Bangalore

Kalburgi Cement Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT Circle -2(1), Hyderabad