CIT v. Patni Computer Systems Ltd.

215 Taxmann 108High Court2013#1230 most cited

What is CIT v. Patni Computer Systems Ltd. authority for?

The provision of an extended credit period or non-charging of interest on delayed receivables from associated enterprises constitutes an international transaction under Section 92B(1) and requires separate benchmarking at arm's length, even retrospectively due to the Finance Act, 2012 amendment.

92

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Patni Computer Systems Ltd. · Section 92B(1) · Section 92B amendment · Finance Act 2012 · retrospective effect · interest on outstanding receivables · overdue receivables · international transaction · arm's length price · benchmarking · associated enterprises · transfer pricing

Also reported as

33 Taxmann.com 3

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 92BSection 234ASection 270ASection 143(1)Section 144BSection 144C(13)

Issues it is cited on

section 92b(1)interest on outstanding receivablessection 90(3)working capital adjustmentcaptive service providersection 92bmultiple year datarelated party transactionresale price methodtransactional net margin methodr&d expenditurecomparable companies

Judgments citing CIT v. Patni Computer Systems Ltd.

Inductis India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1438/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2011-12 Inductis India Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle 12(1) 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola New Delhi Tower B Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola New Delhi 110 044 Pan: Aaac18497C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. Sh. S.S.Tomar, Adv. Department By : Sh. Hk Chaudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.07.2018

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. HK Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 143Section 92D

…stated that the Delhi Bench in this case has also ITA 1438/Del/2016 Assessment Year:2011-12 Industis India Pvt.Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 12(1), New Delhi noted a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.), which dealt with question of law : (c) `Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amount to international tra…

M/S. Carrier Air- Conditioning & Refrigeration Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 728/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year : 2005-06 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Assessment Year 2010-11 Assessment Year 2011-12 Assessment Year 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT, DR

…been held to be an international transaction. Referring to the discussion in the said order, it was stated that the Delhi Bench in this case has also noted a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.), which dealt with question of law : (c) `Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amount to international…

M/S. Carrier Air- Conditioning & Refrigeration Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1126/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year : 2005-06 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Assessment Year 2010-11 Assessment Year 2011-12 Assessment Year 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT, DR

…been held to be an international transaction. Referring to the discussion in the said order, it was stated that the Delhi Bench in this case has also noted a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.), which dealt with question of law : (c) `Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amount to international…

M/S. Avl India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4529/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Manoneet Dalal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 92B

…e contention taken by the assessee before the authorities below that interest on receivables is not an international transaction, turns out to be bereft of any force. 6. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.) dealt, inter alia, with the following question of law:- “(c) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such 6 And 4275/Del/2016 credit pe…

Bechtel India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6530/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 May 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri C.M. Gargassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Saini, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri T.M. Shivakumar, CIT, DR &
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 92Section 92C

…arged. Under such circumstances, the contention taken by the assessee before the TPO that it is not an international transaction, turns out to be bereft of any force. 23. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.) dealt, inter alia, with the following question of law:- “(c) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amount…

Mckinsey Knowledge Centre India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 14 of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6648/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 May 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishimckinsey Knowledge Centre India Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Ltd, Circle-16(2) 3Rd Floor, Block-Iii, Vatika Business Park, New Delhi Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon Pan:Aaccm2356G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Porus KakaFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 144CSection 92C

…taken by the assessee before the TPO that interest on receivables is not an international transaction, was found by the Bench to be bereft of any force. 60. We find that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.) dealt, inter alia, with the following question of law:- 19 "(c) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amou…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Dabur India Ltd, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of the department is dismissed

ITA 3492/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava, Jm Ita No. 3257/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Dabur India Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 8/3, Asaf Ali Road, Tax, Central Circle-22, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd0474C

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR
Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92ASection 92BSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava, JM ITA No. 3257/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Dabur India Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner of Income 8/3, Asaf Ali Road, Tax, Central Circle-22, New Delhi New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACD0474C ITA No. 3492/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Dy. Commissioner of Income Vs Dabur India Ltd., Tax, Circle-10(1), 8/3, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACD0474C Assessee by : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. & Sh. Chandan Aggarwal, CA Revenue by : Sh. Amrendra…

M/S Dabur India Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of the department is dismissed

ITA 3257/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava, Jm Ita No. 3257/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Dabur India Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 8/3, Asaf Ali Road, Tax, Central Circle-22, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd0474C

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR
Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92ASection 92BSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava, JM ITA No. 3257/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Dabur India Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner of Income 8/3, Asaf Ali Road, Tax, Central Circle-22, New Delhi New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACD0474C ITA No. 3492/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Dy. Commissioner of Income Vs Dabur India Ltd., Tax, Circle-10(1), 8/3, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACD0474C Assessee by : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. & Sh. Chandan Aggarwal, CA Revenue by : Sh. Amrendra…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 615/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I-1’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Sh. Kuldip Singh, JM ITA No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income 414, 4th Floor, DLF Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, DDA New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4th Floor, DLF Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (LTU), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, DDA District Cent…

Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 302/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I-1’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Sh. Kuldip Singh, JM ITA No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income 414, 4th Floor, DLF Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, DDA New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4th Floor, DLF Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (LTU), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, DDA District Cent…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Mckinsey Kinowledge Centre India Pvt. Ltd, Gurgaon

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

ITA 499/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Assessment Year : 2011-12 Mckinsey Knowledge Centre Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 3Rd Floor, Block-Iii, Circle-16(2), Vatika Business Park, New Delhi. Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaccm2356G Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Mckinsey Knowledge Circle-16(2), Centre Pvt. Ltd., 3Rd Floor, Block-Iii, New Delhi. Vatika Business Park, Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaccm2356G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate & Shri Divesh Chawla, Advocate Department By : Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit, Dr & Shri Neeraj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.12.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.12.2016 Order Per R.S. Syal, Am: These Two Cross Appeals – One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue - Are Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Dated

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR &
Section 143(3)Section 144C

…en by the assessee before the TPO that interest on receivables is not an international transaction, was found by the Bench to be bereft of any force. 60. We find that the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.) dealt, inter alia, with the following question of law:- “(c) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amou…

Mckinsey Knowledge Centre Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 154/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Assessment Year : 2011-12 Mckinsey Knowledge Centre Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 3Rd Floor, Block-Iii, Circle-16(2), Vatika Business Park, New Delhi. Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaccm2356G Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Mckinsey Knowledge Circle-16(2), Centre Pvt. Ltd., 3Rd Floor, Block-Iii, New Delhi. Vatika Business Park, Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaccm2356G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate & Shri Divesh Chawla, Advocate Department By : Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit, Dr & Shri Neeraj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.12.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.12.2016 Order Per R.S. Syal, Am: These Two Cross Appeals – One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue - Are Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Dated

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR &
Section 143(3)Section 144C

…en by the assessee before the TPO that interest on receivables is not an international transaction, was found by the Bench to be bereft of any force. 60. We find that the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.) dealt, inter alia, with the following question of law:- “(c) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amou…