LG Electronics Pvt Ltd. v. ACIT

22 ITR (Trib) 1Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#9536 most cited

What is LG Electronics Pvt Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

The Assessing Officer may determine the arm's length price (ALP) of an international transaction, including aggregated advertising and marketing promotion (AMP) expenses, in light of the Special Bench decision in LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2020.

Also referred to as

LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT · 22 ITR (Trib) 1 · ITAT · arm's length price · ALP · international transaction · AMP expenses · Bright Line Test · BLT · Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India P. Ltd. v. CIT

Judgments citing LG Electronics Pvt Ltd. v. ACIT

M/S. Bacardi India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1970/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 92C

…Act’). The consequential question was how the arm’s length price (‘ALP’) of such an international transaction should be determined. 3. In the impugned order the ITAT has followed the decision of its Special Bench in LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT 2013 22 ITR (Trib) 1 (ITAT[Del]) and remanded the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer (‘AO’) to decide the issue in the light of that decision. 4. The decision of the Special Bench of the ITAT in LG Electronics (supra) was examined by this Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del). T…

Haier Appliances India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2279/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: FixedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 2279/Del/2018 (A.Y 2008-09) (Through Video Conferencing) Vs Haier Appliances India Pvt. Dcit Ltd. Circle-11(1) Building No. 1, Okhla Phase- New Delhi (Respondent) Iii, New Delhi Pin: 110020 Pan: Aabch3162L (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv, Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv, Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv Respondent By Sh. Surender Pal, Cit(Dr)

Section 144Section 254Section 92C

…of Rs. 57,24,40,796/-in AY 2008- 09 by the TPO after considering the AMP expenses of Rs. 74,04,23,369/- and upheld by the DRP, was challenged before the ITAT. Hon'ble Tribunal following the decision of ITAT (SB) in case of LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd (2013) 22 ITR (Trib) 1 (Delhi) (SB) approve the application of Bright line test and held that ALP of AMP expenses should be determined by cost plus method after excluding the selling expenses like rebate, discount etc. The matter was taken before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi which framed 5 questions of law as listed out in para 7 of the ITAT Delhi order dated 28…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Hyundai Motors India Ltd., Kancheepuram

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

ITA 761/CHNY/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2011-2012

Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

…I.T.A. No. 739 and 853 /Chny/2014, 563 and 614 /Chny/2015, 842 and 761/Chny/16 and CO 73/Chny/16 Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 Page 1 of 55 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI D BENCH, CHENNAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and G Pavan Kumar JM] I.T.A. No. 853/Chny/2014 and 563/Chny/2015 Assessment year: 2009-10 and 2010-11 Hyundai Motor India Limited ………….….........Appellant Plot No. H-1 SPICOT Industrial Park Irrungattukottai, Sriperumbudur Taluk Kancheepuram 602 117 [PAN: AAACH2364M] Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax LTU-II, Chennai ……………......Respondent I.T.A. No. 739/Chny/2014 and 614…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Hyundai Motor India Ltd., Kancheepuram

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

ITA 614/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

…I.T.A. No. 739 and 853 /Chny/2014, 563 and 614 /Chny/2015, 842 and 761/Chny/16 and CO 73/Chny/16 Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 Page 1 of 55 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI D BENCH, CHENNAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and G Pavan Kumar JM] I.T.A. No. 853/Chny/2014 and 563/Chny/2015 Assessment year: 2009-10 and 2010-11 Hyundai Motor India Limited ………….….........Appellant Plot No. H-1 SPICOT Industrial Park Irrungattukottai, Sriperumbudur Taluk Kancheepuram 602 117 [PAN: AAACH2364M] Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax LTU-II, Chennai ……………......Respondent I.T.A. No. 739/Chny/2014 and 614…

Hyundai Motor India Limited, Kancheepuram vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

ITA 563/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

…I.T.A. No. 739 and 853 /Chny/2014, 563 and 614 /Chny/2015, 842 and 761/Chny/16 and CO 73/Chny/16 Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 Page 1 of 55 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI D BENCH, CHENNAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and G Pavan Kumar JM] I.T.A. No. 853/Chny/2014 and 563/Chny/2015 Assessment year: 2009-10 and 2010-11 Hyundai Motor India Limited ………….….........Appellant Plot No. H-1 SPICOT Industrial Park Irrungattukottai, Sriperumbudur Taluk Kancheepuram 602 117 [PAN: AAACH2364M] Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax LTU-II, Chennai ……………......Respondent I.T.A. No. 739/Chny/2014 and 614…

Hyundai Motor India Limited, Kancheepuram vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

ITA 853/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

…I.T.A. No. 739 and 853 /Chny/2014, 563 and 614 /Chny/2015, 842 and 761/Chny/16 and CO 73/Chny/16 Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 Page 1 of 55 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI D BENCH, CHENNAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and G Pavan Kumar JM] I.T.A. No. 853/Chny/2014 and 563/Chny/2015 Assessment year: 2009-10 and 2010-11 Hyundai Motor India Limited ………….….........Appellant Plot No. H-1 SPICOT Industrial Park Irrungattukottai, Sriperumbudur Taluk Kancheepuram 602 117 [PAN: AAACH2364M] Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax LTU-II, Chennai ……………......Respondent I.T.A. No. 739/Chny/2014 and 614…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Hyundai Motor India Limited, Kancheepuram

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

ITA 739/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 253(4)

…I.T.A. No. 739 and 853 /Chny/2014, 563 and 614 /Chny/2015, 842 and 761/Chny/16 and CO 73/Chny/16 Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 Page 1 of 55 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI D BENCH, CHENNAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and G Pavan Kumar JM] I.T.A. No. 853/Chny/2014 and 563/Chny/2015 Assessment year: 2009-10 and 2010-11 Hyundai Motor India Limited ………….….........Appellant Plot No. H-1 SPICOT Industrial Park Irrungattukottai, Sriperumbudur Taluk Kancheepuram 602 117 [PAN: AAACH2364M] Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax LTU-II, Chennai ……………......Respondent I.T.A. No. 739/Chny/2014 and 614…

Panasonic India Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as 10

ITA 479/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 479/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-2008. M/S. Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Spic Building Annexe, 6Th Floor, Income Tax, 88, Mount Road, Company Circle V(1) Guindy, Chennai. Chennai 600 032. [Pan Aadcp 9391B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Dinodia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri.Durai Pandian, Sr. A.R

Section 271(1)Section 92BSection 92F

…direct the Transfer Pricing Officer to pass a consequential order by verifying the fact after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee’’. The Tribunal following the Special Bench decision in the case of L.G. Electronics India (P) Ltd vs. ACIT (2013) 22 ITR (Trib) 1 held that the component of business promotion expenditure had to be considered as expended for the purpose of the business of the assessee in India and not relatable to any brand building. However, as per the Tribunal, advertisement expenditure component of "8,99,49,473/- out of the total advertisement and sales promotion expenditure of "16,…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Haier Appliances (India) P. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1582/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri Kuldip Singh :Asstt. Yr. 2009-10 Haier Appliances India Ltd., Vs. Dcit Circle 12(1), B-1/A-14, Mohan Co-Op. New Delhi. Indl. Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi. Pan: Aabch 3162 L & Asstt. Yr. 2009-10 Dcit Circle 12(1), Vs. Haier Appliances India Ltd., New Delhi. B-1/A-14, Mohan Co-Op. Indl. Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi. (Appellant ) ( Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Manish Kumar CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-1” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH : JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Yr. 2009-10 Haier Appliances India Ltd., Vs. DCIT Circle 12(1), B-1/A-14, Mohan Co-op. New Delhi. Indl. Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi. PAN: AABCH 3162 L AND Asstt. Yr. 2009-10 DCIT Circle 12(1), Vs. Haier Appliances India Ltd., New Delhi. B-1/A-14, Mohan Co-op. Indl. Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi. (Appellant ) ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra Shri Neeraj Jain Adv. Shri Abhishek Agarwal CA Revenue by: Shri Manish Kumar CIT(DR) Date of hea…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax - 8 New Delhi vs. M/S Sony Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd

The appeals are disposed of in the above terms

ITA/648/2015HC Delhi28 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…Act'). The consequential question was how the arm's length price ('ALP') of such an international transaction should be determined. 3. In the impugned order the ITAT has followed the decision of its Special Bench in LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT 2013 22 ITR (Trib) 1 (ITAT[Del]) and remanded the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer ('AO') to decide the issue in the light of that decision. 4. The decision of the Special Bench of the ITAT in LG Electronics (supra) was examined by this Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India P. Ltd. V. Commissioner of Income Tax (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del). Th…

Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals are disposed of in the above terms

ITA/638/2015HC Delhi28 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…Act'). The consequential question was how the arm's length price ('ALP') of such an international transaction should be determined. 3. In the impugned order the ITAT has followed the decision of its Special Bench in LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT 2013 22 ITR (Trib) 1 (ITAT[Del]) and remanded the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer ('AO') to decide the issue in the light of that decision. 4. The decision of the Special Bench of the ITAT in LG Electronics (supra) was examined by this Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India P. Ltd. V. Commissioner of Income Tax (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del). Th…

LG Electronics Pvt Ltd. v. ACIT (22 ITR (Trib) 1) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax