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.

M/S Erm India P Ltd., New Delhi vs. Neac, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed in part and for statistical purpose

ITA 513/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Sa No. 92/Del/2021 (In Ita No. 513/Del/2021) Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Mr. Ajit Jain, A.R. &For Respondent: Mr. Bhagwati Charan, Sr. DR
Section 144CSection 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 this Court in CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Delhi). 11. From the above, it is, therefore, clear that when once the working capital adjustment is given, it subsumes the interest on receivables and no separate benchmark for it has to be made. Respectfully following the view taken by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kusum Healthcare (supra), we hold that the addition mad…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jaypee Capital Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.3559/Del

ITA 3559/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: And Shri Ashish Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Bhuvnesh Kulshreshtha
Section 132Section 153A

…fusion of capital in accordance with the RBI Guidelines under automatic approval route. Moreover, Jaypee Singapore Pte. Ltd. has made final allotment to the assessee company in AY 2014-15. 20. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case of CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. 345 ITR 241 held as under :- "17. The significance of the aforesaid guidelines lies in the fact that they recognise that barring exceptional cases, the tax administration should not disregard the actual transaction or 103 ITA.No.3558 & 3559/Del./2016 M/s. Jaypee Capital Services Ltd., New Delhi. substitute other transactions for them and the examination of…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jaypee Capital Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.3559/Del

ITA 3558/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: And Shri Ashish Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Bhuvnesh Kulshreshtha
Section 132Section 153A

…fusion of capital in accordance with the RBI Guidelines under automatic approval route. Moreover, Jaypee Singapore Pte. Ltd. has made final allotment to the assessee company in AY 2014-15. 20. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case of CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. 345 ITR 241 held as under :- "17. The significance of the aforesaid guidelines lies in the fact that they recognise that barring exceptional cases, the tax administration should not disregard the actual transaction or 103 ITA.No.3558 & 3559/Del./2016 M/s. Jaypee Capital Services Ltd., New Delhi. substitute other transactions for them and the examination of…

Indus Mobile Distribtion Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Central Circle 1(1), Chennai

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

ITA 915/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 915/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Indus Mobile Distribution Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 281, Ttk Road, Alwarpet, Vs. Income Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Chennai 600 018. Chennai. [Pan:Aabci6304D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 01.09.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16.09.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Chennai, Dated 22.11.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12. The Effective Grounds Raised In The Appeal Relate To Confirmation Of Disallowance Of Depreciation On Trademark & Confirmation Of Disallowance Of Advertisement Expenditure & Professional Charges.

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मऺजुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member & Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 915/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Indus Mobile Distribution Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner of No. 281, TTK Road, Alwarpet, Vs. Income Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Chennai 600 018. Chennai. [PAN:AABCI6304D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Re…

DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. At Kearney Ltd.- India Branch Office, Gurgaon

In the result, ITA.No.7888/Del

ITA 7888/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: And Shri Ashish Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 195

…oup services by observing as under : “5.3. I have considered the arguments of the AR and the order of TPO. In light of various judicial precedents including CIT vs EKL 5 ITA.Nos.7887 & 7888/Del./2017 M/s. AT Kearney Limited, Gurgaon. Appliances Ltd., [2012] 345 ITR 241, Dresser- Rand India Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income\Tax, 2012 (13) ITR (Trib) 422 and Commissioner of Income Tax-I vs. Cushman and Wakefield India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 475/2012), it has been clearly established that it is beyond the powers of the Transfer Pricing Officer to question the commercial wisdom of the Assessee. The TPO's a…

DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. At Kearney Ltd.- India Branch Office, Gurgaon

In the result, ITA.No.7888/Del

ITA 7887/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: And Shri Ashish Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 195

…oup services by observing as under : “5.3. I have considered the arguments of the AR and the order of TPO. In light of various judicial precedents including CIT vs EKL 5 ITA.Nos.7887 & 7888/Del./2017 M/s. AT Kearney Limited, Gurgaon. Appliances Ltd., [2012] 345 ITR 241, Dresser- Rand India Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income\Tax, 2012 (13) ITR (Trib) 422 and Commissioner of Income Tax-I vs. Cushman and Wakefield India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 475/2012), it has been clearly established that it is beyond the powers of the Transfer Pricing Officer to question the commercial wisdom of the Assessee. The TPO's a…

Cadila Healthcare Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal for the assessment year 2013-14 is also partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 213/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Aug 2021AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)

…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(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". 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,…

Cadila Healthcare Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal for the assessment year 2013-14 is also partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 954/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Aug 2021AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)

…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(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". 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,…

M/S Glaxosmithkline Asia Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Chandigarh

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

ITA 532/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jul 2021AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.AdvFor Respondent: Smt. C. Chandrakanta, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

…R 200 (SC) - S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT : 288 ITR 1 (SC) - C1T v. Bharti Televentures Ltd: 331 ITR 502 (Del) -C1T v. Padmani Packaging (P) Ltd. : 155 Taxmann 268 (Del) -C1T v. Rockinan Cycle Industries Ltd.: 331 ITR 401 (P&H) (FB) -CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. : 345 ITR 241 (Del HC) It is a settled position that the expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business would be allowable as deduction under section 37(1) of the Act, even if it results in a direct or incidental benefit to a third party. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: ITA No.2453/Del/2016 A.Y. 2005-06 & ITA No.…

M/S Exide Life Insurance Company Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 839/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Exide Life Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No.3/1, Jp Technopark Millers Road, Income Tax, Bengaluru – 560 001. Circle – 2(1)(2), Pan : Aaaci 7940 L Bengaluru. Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Surya Narayana, Advocate Respondent By : Shri. Muzaffar Hussain, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 26.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.07.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 18.02.2019 Of Cit(A), Bengaluru-2, Bengaluru, Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The First Issue That Requires Adjudication In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Cit(A) Was Justified In Upholding The Order Of The Ao In Determining The Alp Of The International Transaction Pertaining To Payment For Intra Group Services As Nil Against A Sum Of Rs.4,06,89,430/- Claimed By The Assessee To Have Been Paid To The Ae & Adding The Sum Of Rs.4,06,89,430/- As Income Of The Assessee Under Section 92 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act). Page 2 Of 13 3. The Facts With Regard To The Aforesaid Issue Are As Follows:

For Appellant: Shri. Surya Narayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 92

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2013-14 M/s. Exide Life Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of No.3/1, JP Technopark Millers Road, Income Tax, Bengaluru – 560 001. Circle – 2(1)(2), PAN : AAACI 7940 L Bengaluru. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri. Surya Narayana, Advocate Respondent by : Shri. Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru Date of hearing : 26.07.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 27.07.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevan, Vice President This is an appea…

ACIT-8(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Rabo India Finance Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, this appeal is dismissed

ITA 1459/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2021AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 253Section 69

…he TPO is only to determine ALP by applying most appropriate method specified under section 92C(1) of the Act. It is not the domain of TPO to determine allow ability of the expenditure. Similar view has been expressed in the case of CIT vs. EKL Appliance Ltd. 345 ITR 241 (Delhi). The Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that the TPO cannot question commercial expediency of the transaction or the quantum of benefit derived. 15. In the instant case the assessee has borrowed funds from Rabobank Hong Kong to finance its working capital requirements. The interest paid to Rabobank Hong Kong on ECB has been reflected in the bo…

Rabo India Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 1(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2177/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2021AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 253Section 69

…he TPO is only to determine ALP by applying most appropriate method specified under section 92C(1) of the Act. It is not the domain of TPO to determine allow ability of the expenditure. Similar view has been expressed in the case of CIT vs. EKL Appliance Ltd. 345 ITR 241 (Delhi). The Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that the TPO cannot question commercial expediency of the transaction or the quantum of benefit derived. 15. In the instant case the assessee has borrowed funds from Rabobank Hong Kong to finance its working capital requirements. The interest paid to Rabobank Hong Kong on ECB has been reflected in the bo…

Owens Corning Industries (India) P. Ltd. Mahabubnagar (Previously Known As Saint Gobain Vetrotex India Ltd), Mahabubnagar vs. ITO, Ward-16(2), Hyderabad

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 826/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Ms. Suchita Kanedia, ARFor Respondent: Sri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD ‘A’ BENCH : Hyderabad (Through Video Conference) Before Shri S.S. GODARA, Judicial Member and Shri L.P. SAHU, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 825 & 826/Hyd./2016 Assessment Years: 2005-06 and 2010-11 Owens Corning Industries (India) Pvt.Ltd vs. Dy.CIT, Circle 3(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Previously known as Saint Gobain Vetrotex India Limited] [PAN: AAACV9858N] (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Ms. Suchita Kanedia, AR For Revenue: Sri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR Date of Hearing : 20/04/2021 Date of Pronouncement : 21/06/2021 O R D E R PER S.S. GODARA, J.M. These tw…

Owens Corning Industries (India) P. Ltd. Mahabubnagar (Previously Known As Saint Gobain Vetrotex India Ltd), Mahabubnagar vs. DCIT, Circle 3(1), Hyderabad

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 825/HYD/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jun 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Ms. Suchita Kanedia, ARFor Respondent: Sri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD ‘A’ BENCH : Hyderabad (Through Video Conference) Before Shri S.S. GODARA, Judicial Member and Shri L.P. SAHU, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 825 & 826/Hyd./2016 Assessment Years: 2005-06 and 2010-11 Owens Corning Industries (India) Pvt.Ltd vs. Dy.CIT, Circle 3(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Previously known as Saint Gobain Vetrotex India Limited] [PAN: AAACV9858N] (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Ms. Suchita Kanedia, AR For Revenue: Sri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR Date of Hearing : 20/04/2021 Date of Pronouncement : 21/06/2021 O R D E R PER S.S. GODARA, J.M. These tw…

DCIT vs. M/S 3M India Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose and that of the Revenue partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 796/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No. 780/Bang/2013 Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Bhuttani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR), ITAT, Bangalore
Section 92Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 780/Bang/2013 Assessment Year : 2007-08 3M India Limited, Vs. The Additional Commissioner Plot No.48-51, Electronic City, of Income Tax, Hosur Road, Large Taxpayers Unit (LTU), Bangalore – 561 229. Bangalore. PAN: AAACB 5724H APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(TP)A No. 796/Bang/2013 Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. 3M India Limited, of Income Tax,Large Taxpayers Unit Plot No.48-51, Electronic City, (LTU),Bangalore. JSS Towers, 100 Hosur Road,…

3M India Ltd vs. Addl.C.I.T

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose and that of the Revenue partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 780/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No. 780/Bang/2013 Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Bhuttani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR), ITAT, Bangalore
Section 92Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 780/Bang/2013 Assessment Year : 2007-08 3M India Limited, Vs. The Additional Commissioner Plot No.48-51, Electronic City, of Income Tax, Hosur Road, Large Taxpayers Unit (LTU), Bangalore – 561 229. Bangalore. PAN: AAACB 5724H APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(TP)A No. 796/Bang/2013 Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. 3M India Limited, of Income Tax,Large Taxpayers Unit Plot No.48-51, Electronic City, (LTU),Bangalore. JSS Towers, 100 Hosur Road,…

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

In the result, the appeal of assessee are allowed

ITA 8700/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit E-9, Connaught Hose, Circle – 2(2), Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi - 110001 Pan No. Aaaca 0364 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Taran Deep Singh, Adv. Revenue By Shri Surender Pal, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18/05/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.09.2019 Of The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Act Pursuant To The Direction Of Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) – 1, Delhi For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under :

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(2)Section 144C(5)Section 92BSection 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92F

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

Adama India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 934/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 May 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Ms. Mahima Goud & Kruthika Prakash, ARFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai, CIT D.R
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…against and in favour of the impugned TP adjustment relating to receipt of management services in the nature of an intangible transaction. Case law CIT vs. Cushman and Wakefiled (India) Pvt.Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 730 (Del) and CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Del.) holds that it is not within the domain of the “TPO” to determine the actual benefits derived from the International transactions in issue which needs to be seen from assessee’s view point going by common business prudence only. We make it clear that the assessee has already filed its detailed paper book in the ITA No. 934/Hyd/2019 AY 2013…

Greatship (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 901/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

Section 143(3)

…he purposes of arriving at the arm's length price. It is well-settled that in the transfer pricing mechanism, it is not open for the Revenue to re-characterise/restructure the transaction. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of EKL Appliances Ltd. [2012] 345 ITR 241 has held that the revenue authorities cannot restructure/re-characterize a legitimate transaction. It was held as under:- 17. The significance of the aforesaid guidelines lies in the fact that they that barring exceptional coses, the tux administration should not the actual transaction or substitute other transactions for them examination of a c…

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

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2228/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2021AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 27i

…nd has been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of its business. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Sassoon J. David Vs. CIT (1979) 118 ITR 261 as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. 341 ITR 241 (Del). Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that the expenditure in respect of warranty was wholly and exclusively incurred by the assessee for the purpose of its business and was not in the nature of capital or personal nature and thus entitled to deduction under Section 37(1) of the Act. 8. As regards ground No. 4, the Ld. AR submitted that the same is…