Demag Cranes & Components India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

49 SOT 610Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2012#6106 most cited

What is Demag Cranes & Components India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

Transfer pricing analysis should be confined to international transactions with associated enterprises and not include transactions with non-associated enterprises. Adjustments to the profit margin of a tested party can be made for factors like under-utilized capacity, especially when comparable company data on such factors is unavailable.

19

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Demag Cranes & Components India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT · 49 SOT 610 · transfer pricing analysis · associated enterprises · non-associated enterprises · tested party · profit margin adjustment · capacity utilization adjustment · comparable companies

Issues it is cited on

economic adjustmentworking capital adjustmenttested partyfunctional analysistransactional net margin methodmanagement feesspecified domestic transactionrelated party transactioncomparable companiesmost appropriate methodbenchmarking analysisarm's length price

Judgments citing Demag Cranes & Components India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

M/S. Shindengen India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 2514/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice- & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No. 2514/Bang/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Shindengen India Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 283/2, Bommasandra, The Deputy Jigani Link Road, Commissioner Of Jigani Industrial Area, Income Tax, Anekal Taluk, Circle – 6(1)(1), Bengaluru – 560 105. Bengaluru. Vs. Pan: Aarcs8947E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Shashi M Kapila, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 14-02-2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-02-2023 Order Per Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Smt. Shashi M Kapila, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 92C

…0B(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules does not impede the adjustment of the profit margin of tested party. The above view has also been upheld in the following decisions:- • Capegemini India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.7861/Mum/2011) • Demang Cranes & Components (India) Pvt Ltd. [49 SOT 610 (Pune)] 30. As far as data of comparable companies on capacity utilization being not available in public domain is concerned, it is practically not possible to obtain data on capacity utilization of comparable companies and consequently compute adjustment on the comparable companies, the operating cost of the tested party is adjusted for capacity…

M/S Toyota Kirloskar Motors (P) Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu Circle-1, Bangalore

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

ITA 150/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, D.R
Section 40A(2)

…(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules does not impede the adjustment of the profit margin of tested party. The above view has also been upheld in the following decisions:- • Capegemini India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.7861/Mum/2011) • Demang Cranes & Components (India) Pvt Ltd. [49 SOT 610 (Pune)] 32. As far as data of comparable companies on capacity utilization being not available in public domain is concerned, it is practically not possible to obtain data on capacity utilization of comparable companies and consequently compute adjustment on the comparable companies, the operating cost of the tested party is adjusted for capacity…

Witzenmann India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Cir. -2(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 222/KOL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sm. Pallavi Paul, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…0B(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules does not impede the adjustment of the profit margin of tested party. The above view has also been upheld in the following decisions:- • Capegemini India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 7861/Mum/2011) • Demang Cranes & Components (India) Pvt Ltd.[49 SOT 610 (Pune)] … 31. The assessee has under-utilized capacity during the subject AY and is accordingly factually and legally eligible to an adjustment for the same. Therefore, such a benefit cannot be denied to the assessee only for the reason that the data about comparable companies is not available. Requiring the assessee to produce such a data which i…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Officer Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Fmc India Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed and appeal filed by revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2732/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Fmc India Pvt. The Assistant Ltd., Commissioner Of Embassy Star 1St Floor, Income Tax, No. 8 Palace Road, Circle 3(1)(1), Bangalore – 560 052. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aaacf4579N Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2013-14 (By Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Nageswar Rao, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. S. Praveena, Cit Drp-2 Date Of Hearing : 07-07-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-09-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Cross Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against Order Dated 23/07/2018 Passes By The Ld.Cit(A)-3, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2013-14 On Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, CIT DRP-2
Section 250Section 37(1)

…ion in Rule 10B(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules does not impede the adjustment of the profit margin of tested party. This view is laid down in the following decisions:- • Capegemini India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.7861/Mum/2011) • Demang Cranes & Components (India) Pvt Ltd. [49 SOT 610 (Pune)] 18.11 Forex loss/gain may arise in the normal course of the business, and can be reckoned as operating in nature, however the loss/gain arising on account of abnormal fluctuation or on Page 33 of 35 ITA Nos. 2611 & 2732/Bang/2018 account of abnormal movement in forward exchange contracts has to be treated as non-operating in nature. We pl…

M/S Fmc India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed and appeal filed by revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2611/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Fmc India Pvt. The Assistant Ltd., Commissioner Of Embassy Star 1St Floor, Income Tax, No. 8 Palace Road, Circle 3(1)(1), Bangalore – 560 052. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aaacf4579N Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2013-14 (By Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Nageswar Rao, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. S. Praveena, Cit Drp-2 Date Of Hearing : 07-07-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-09-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Cross Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against Order Dated 23/07/2018 Passes By The Ld.Cit(A)-3, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2013-14 On Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, CIT DRP-2
Section 250Section 37(1)

…ion in Rule 10B(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules does not impede the adjustment of the profit margin of tested party. This view is laid down in the following decisions:- • Capegemini India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.7861/Mum/2011) • Demang Cranes & Components (India) Pvt Ltd. [49 SOT 610 (Pune)] 18.11 Forex loss/gain may arise in the normal course of the business, and can be reckoned as operating in nature, however the loss/gain arising on account of abnormal fluctuation or on Page 33 of 35 ITA Nos. 2611 & 2732/Bang/2018 account of abnormal movement in forward exchange contracts has to be treated as non-operating in nature. We pl…

M/S. Airbus Group India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2385/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Sumeet Khurana, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92D

…B(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules does not impede the adjustment of the profit margin of tested party. The above view has also been upheld in the following decisions:- • Capegemini India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.7861/Mum/2011) • Demang Cranes & Components (India) Pvt Ltd. [49 SOT 610 (Pune)] 32. As far as data of comparable companies on capacity utilization being not available in public domain is concerned, it is practically not possible to obtain data on capacity utilization of comparable companies and consequently compute adjustment on the comparable companies, the operating cost of the tested party is adjusted for capacity…

M/S Denso Kirloskar Industries Pvt.Ltd., Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore

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

ITA 73/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V.S. Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESEIDENT AND SHRI PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 73/Bang/2017 Assessment year : 2012-13 Denso Kirloskar Industries Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of 30th KM Stone, Tumkur Road, Income-tax – LTU, NH 4, Vishveshwarapura, Circle 1, Nelamangala, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 562 123. PAN: AABCO 0042P ASSESSEE RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri T. Suryanarayana, Advocate Respondent by : Shri V.S. Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 23.06.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 20.07.2022 O R D E R P…

M/S Tokai Rika Minda India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Cicle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1513/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…B(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules does not impede the adjustment of the profit margin of tested party. The above view has also been upheld in the following decisions:- • Capegemini India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.7861/Mum/2011) • Demang Cranes & Components (India) Pvt Ltd. [49 SOT 610 (Pune)] 30. As far as data of comparable companies on capacity utilization being not available in public domain is concerned, it is practically not possible to obtain data on capacity utilization of comparable companies and consequently compute adjustment on the comparable companies, the operating cost of the tested party is adjusted for capacity…

M/S.Tokai Rika Minda India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

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

ITA 2327/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.2327/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 M/S.Tokai Rika Minda India The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited Income-Tax, Circle 7(1)(1) V. Bangalore. Plot No.365, Sompura 1St Stage Kiadb Industrial Area Dobbaspet, Nelamangala Taluk Bangalore Rural Dist – 562 111. Pan : Aadct0271C. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Pradeep Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 08.04.2022 Date Of Hearing : 22.03.2022

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…0B(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules does not impede the adjustment of the profit margin of tested party. The above view has also been upheld in the following decisions:- • Capegemini India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.7861/Mum/2011) • Demang Cranes & Components (India) Pvt Ltd. [49 SOT 610 (Pune)] 30. As far as data of comparable companies on capacity utilization being not available in public domain is concerned, it is practically not possible to obtain data on capacity utilization of comparable companies and consequently compute adjustment on the comparable companies, the operating cost of the tested party is adjusted for capacity…

M/S Tyco Fire & Security India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 3363/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 3363/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. Tyco Fire & The Assistant Security India Pvt. Ltd., Commissioner Of D-601, Rmz Contennial, Income Tax, Kundalahalli Main Road, Circle – 7 (1)(1), Bangalore – 560 048. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aabct0087C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Rajan Vora, Ca : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Cit Revenue By Dr (Osd) Date Of Hearing : 05-01-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30-03-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 26.10.2018 Passed By The Ld.Acit, Circle – 7(1)(1), Bangalore For Assessment Year 2014-15 On Following Grounds Of Appeal. “Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Tyco Fire & Security India Private Limited (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Appellant"), Respectfully Craves Leave To Prefer An Appeal Against The Appeal Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The "Learned Ao") Dated October 26, 2018 Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") Pursuant To The Directions Dated September 20, 2018 Issued By The Dispute Resolution Panel (Hereinafter Referred To As The "Drp") U/S 144C (5) Of The Act (`The Impugned Order') Inter-Alia On The Following Grounds: That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law:

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, CA
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C

…ion in Rule 10B(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules does not impede the adjustment of the profit margin of tested party. This view is laid down in the following decisions:- • Capegemini India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.7861/Mum/2011) • Demang Cranes & Components (India) Pvt Ltd. [49 SOT 610 (Pune)] 26. Foreign exchange gain or loss relatable to an international transaction is part and parcel of such international transaction. Thus, the argument of the Ld.AR that forex loss is not part of the operating cost cannot be accepted. Forex loss may arise in the normal course of the business and can be reckoned as operating in nature, however…

M/S Brady Company India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1)(4), Bangalore

In the result, ground 26 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 790/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.103/Bang/2019 : Asst.Year 2014-2015 It(Tp)A No.790/Bang/2019 : Asst.Year 2014-2015 M/S.Brady Company India Private The Income Tax Officer Limited, No.26, Survey No.41 Ward 1(1)(4) V. Bengaluru. Konappana Agrahara Village Begur, Hobli, Electronci City, Phase-Ii, Bengaluru – 560 100. Pan : Aaccb8163A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Pradeep Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2022 Date Of Hearing : 07.03.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : These Appeals Are At The Instance Of The Assessee. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2014-2015. 2. The Reason For Filing Two Appeals For Assessment Year 2014-2015 Is That Pursuant To The Dispute Resolution Panel’S (Drp) Directions (Directions Dated 28.09.2008), The A.O. Passed Final Assessment Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The I.T.Act Dated 15.11.2018. In The Said Assessment Order, The Aggregate Transfer Pricing Adjustment Was Determined At Rs.14,43,51,081. An Appeal Has Been Filed Before The Tribunal Against The Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The I.T.Act (Appeal No.It(Tp)A No.103/Bang/2019). Subsequently, On Application By The Assessee, The Drp Passed Rectification Order Dated

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 154

…0B(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules does not impede the adjustment of the profit margin of tested party. The above view has also been upheld in the following decisions:- • Capegemini India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.7861/Mum/2011) • Demang Cranes & Components (India) Pvt Ltd. [49 SOT 610 (Pune)] 32. As far as data of comparable companies on capacity utilization being not available in public domain is concerned, it is practically not possible to obtain data on capacity utilization of comparable companies and consequently compute adjustment on the comparable companies, the operating cost of the tested party is adjusted for capacity…

M/S Brady Company India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1)(4), Bangalore

In the result, ground 26 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 103/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.103/Bang/2019 : Asst.Year 2014-2015 It(Tp)A No.790/Bang/2019 : Asst.Year 2014-2015 M/S.Brady Company India Private The Income Tax Officer Limited, No.26, Survey No.41 Ward 1(1)(4) V. Bengaluru. Konappana Agrahara Village Begur, Hobli, Electronci City, Phase-Ii, Bengaluru – 560 100. Pan : Aaccb8163A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Pradeep Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2022 Date Of Hearing : 07.03.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : These Appeals Are At The Instance Of The Assessee. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2014-2015. 2. The Reason For Filing Two Appeals For Assessment Year 2014-2015 Is That Pursuant To The Dispute Resolution Panel’S (Drp) Directions (Directions Dated 28.09.2008), The A.O. Passed Final Assessment Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The I.T.Act Dated 15.11.2018. In The Said Assessment Order, The Aggregate Transfer Pricing Adjustment Was Determined At Rs.14,43,51,081. An Appeal Has Been Filed Before The Tribunal Against The Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The I.T.Act (Appeal No.It(Tp)A No.103/Bang/2019). Subsequently, On Application By The Assessee, The Drp Passed Rectification Order Dated

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 154

…0B(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules does not impede the adjustment of the profit margin of tested party. The above view has also been upheld in the following decisions:- • Capegemini India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.7861/Mum/2011) • Demang Cranes & Components (India) Pvt Ltd. [49 SOT 610 (Pune)] 32. As far as data of comparable companies on capacity utilization being not available in public domain is concerned, it is practically not possible to obtain data on capacity utilization of comparable companies and consequently compute adjustment on the comparable companies, the operating cost of the tested party is adjusted for capacity…

M/S Continental Automotive Components India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 713/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 92C

…ested party. The above view has also been. upheld in the following decisions:— • Capgemini India Pvt. Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT 12014 33 taxmann.com 5/120141 147 ITD 330 (Mum. - Trib.) • Demag Cranes & Components (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 12014 17 taxmann.com 190/49 SOT 610 (Pune) 32. As far as data of comparable companies on capacity utilization being not available in public domain is concerned, it is practically not possible to obtain data on capacity utilization of comparable companies and consequently compute adjustment on the comparable companies, the operating cost of the tested party is adjusted for capacity u…

Essentra (India) Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(4), Bangalore

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

ITA 1610/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V Vasudevan, Vice Presidnet & Shri B.R Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri T Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143

…f tested party. The above view has also been upheld in the following decisions:- Capgemini India Pvt. Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [20131 33 taxmann.com 5/120141 147 lTD 330 (Mum. - Tub.) Demag Cranes & Components (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [201 21 17 taxmann.com 190/49 SOT 610 (Rune) 32. As far as data of comparable companies on capacity utilization being not available in public domain is concerned, it is practically not possible to obtain data on capacity utilization of comparable companies and IT(TP)A No.1610/Bang/2017 Page 13 of 17 consequently compute adjustment on the comparable companies, the operating cost of t…

Terex India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 6783/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Terex India Pvt. Ltd., Circle-25(1), 5Th Floor, West Wing, E-City, Tower-2, C.R. Building, #94/2 & 95/2, Electronic City Phase-I, Vs New Delhi. Hosur Main Road, Bangalore-560100 Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Terex India Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, 5Th Floor, West Wing, E-City, Tower-2, Circle-25(1), #94/2 & 95/2, Electronic City Phase-I, C.R. Vs Hosur Main Road, Building, Bangalore-560100 New Delhi. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudary, C.I.T. DR

…0B(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules does not impede the adjustment of the profit margin of tested party. The above view has also been upheld in the following decisions:- • Capegemini India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.7861/Mum/2011) • Demang Cranes & Components (India) Pvt Ltd. [49 SOT 610 (Pune)] 32. As far as data of comparable companies on capacity utilization being not available in public domain is concerned, it is practically not possible to obtain data on capacity utilization of comparable companies and consequently compute adjustment on the comparable companies, the operating cost of the tested party is adjusted for capacit…

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

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 6775/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Terex India Pvt. Ltd., Circle-25(1), 5Th Floor, West Wing, E-City, Tower-2, C.R. Building, #94/2 & 95/2, Electronic City Phase-I, Vs New Delhi. Hosur Main Road, Bangalore-560100 Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Terex India Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, 5Th Floor, West Wing, E-City, Tower-2, Circle-25(1), #94/2 & 95/2, Electronic City Phase-I, C.R. Vs Hosur Main Road, Building, Bangalore-560100 New Delhi. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudary, C.I.T. DR

…0B(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules does not impede the adjustment of the profit margin of tested party. The above view has also been upheld in the following decisions:- • Capegemini India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.7861/Mum/2011) • Demang Cranes & Components (India) Pvt Ltd. [49 SOT 610 (Pune)] 32. As far as data of comparable companies on capacity utilization being not available in public domain is concerned, it is practically not possible to obtain data on capacity utilization of comparable companies and consequently compute adjustment on the comparable companies, the operating cost of the tested party is adjusted for capacit…

M/S Ika India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2476/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain & Shri Darpan Kirpalani, CAsFor Respondent: Smt. Sree Nandini Das, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 92

…0B(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules does not impede the adjustment of the profit margin of tested party. The above view has also been upheld in the following decisions:- • Capegemini India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.7861/Mum/2011) • Demang Cranes & Components (India) Pvt Ltd. [49 SOT 610 (Pune)] 30. As far as data of comparable companies on capacity utilization being not available in public domain is concerned, it is practically not possible to obtain data on capacity utilization of comparable companies and consequently compute adjustment on the comparable companies, the operating cost of the tested party is adjusted for capacity…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Visteon Engg. Center (I) Pvt. Ltd., Pune

Accordingly, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 540/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved & Ms. Nupoor ShahFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 143(3)

…alone. We find that the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee‟s own case in ITA No. 358/PN/2013 for assessment year 2008-09 after placing reliance on the decisions rendered in the case of Demag Cranes & Components India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT reported as 49 SOT 610 has held that TP analysis is to be confined to the international transactions undertaken with AEs alone and not in relation to none AE transactions. We deem it appropriate to remit this issue back to the file of TPO to re- compute adjustment in the light of order of Tribunal in assessee‟s own case for assessment year 2008-09 (supra). Accordingly,…

Visteon Engineering Center (India) Private Ltd., Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

Accordingly, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 316/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved & Ms. Nupoor ShahFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 143(3)

…alone. We find that the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee‟s own case in ITA No. 358/PN/2013 for assessment year 2008-09 after placing reliance on the decisions rendered in the case of Demag Cranes & Components India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT reported as 49 SOT 610 has held that TP analysis is to be confined to the international transactions undertaken with AEs alone and not in relation to none AE transactions. We deem it appropriate to remit this issue back to the file of TPO to re- compute adjustment in the light of order of Tribunal in assessee‟s own case for assessment year 2008-09 (supra). Accordingly,…

Demag Cranes & Components India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (49 SOT 610) — Cited in 19 Judgments | BharatTax