LG Electronics v. ACIT

22 ITR 1Supreme Court of India2013#5003 most cited

What is LG Electronics v. ACIT authority for?

The Special Bench decision in LG Electronics v. ACIT affirmed the applicability of the 'Bright Line Test' for determining international transactions related to advertising, marketing, and promotion (AMP) expenses.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Also referred to as

LG Electronics v. ACIT · 22 ITR 1 · Special Bench · Bright Line Test · AMP expenses · international transaction · transfer pricing · deemed dividend · section 2(22)(e) · closely held company

Issues it is cited on

closely held companysection 47accumulated profitssection 2(22)deemed dividendsection 2(22)(e)beneficial ownerdirect tax vivad se vishwasliable to taxsection 56escapement of incomevivad se vishwas

Judgments citing LG Electronics v. ACIT

Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

ITA 2511/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Respondent: Mr. H.K. Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 145ASection 271(1)(c)

…prevailing understanding as to the applicability of the Bright Line Test, holding that the AMP expenses were subject to adjustment. The Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) affirmed this view. In the meanwhile, the Special Bench had in LG Electronics v. ACIT (2013) 22 ITR 1 (SB) enunciated and affirmed the Bright Line Test rule. That view was subsequently overruled by this Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118. The ITAT in this case has remitted the entire matter for reconsideration to the TPO. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties. In Le Passage to India…

Le Passage to India Tour & Travels (P) Ltd vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is partly allowed in the above terms

ITA/369/2016HC Delhi12 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…rnational transaction, is erroneous. 2. The Court notices that all the tax authorities consistently applied the “bright line method” which was applicable at that time enunciated by I.T.A.T.’s Special Bench in L.G. Electronics (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT [2013] 22 ITR 1 (SB) (Del) (Trib.). That decision was, however, overturned by a Division Bench of this Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 374 ITR 118 (Del). 3. The Revenue had contended that the question of law was ITAs 368 & 369 of 2016 Page 3 of 4 answered by referring to the discussion of the I.T.A.T. in the impugned jud…

Le Passage to India Tour & Travels (P) Ltd vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is partly allowed in the above terms

ITA/368/2016HC Delhi12 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…rnational transaction, is erroneous. 2. The Court notices that all the tax authorities consistently applied the “bright line method” which was applicable at that time enunciated by I.T.A.T.’s Special Bench in L.G. Electronics (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT [2013] 22 ITR 1 (SB) (Del) (Trib.). That decision was, however, overturned by a Division Bench of this Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 374 ITR 118 (Del). 3. The Revenue had contended that the question of law was ITAs 368 & 369 of 2016 Page 3 of 4 answered by referring to the discussion of the I.T.A.T. in the impugned jud…