Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (MSIL) v. Addl. CIT, TPO

328 ITR 210High Court2010#3012 most cited

What is Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (MSIL) v. Addl. CIT, TPO authority for?

AMP expenditure is not an international transaction. The Bright Line Test is not a valid basis for determining the existence of an international transaction or computing the arm's length price.

39

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd v Addl CIT TPO · 328 ITR 210 · AMP expenditure · international transaction · arm's length price · Bright Line Test · section 92B · section 35(1)(i)

Sections most often in play

Section 35(1)(i)Section 92B

Issues it is cited on

section 92f(v)bright line testamp expendituresection 92fsection 92ca(1)transactional net margin methodsection 92bexplanation to section 37r&d expenditurecomparable companiesarm's length pricetransfer pricing adjustment

Judgments citing Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (MSIL) v. Addl. CIT, TPO

Loreal India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 7(1)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 7194/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri Ravish Soodm/S L‘Oreal India Pvt. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of A-Wing, 8Th Floor, Income Tax, Circle 7(1)(2), Marathan Futurex, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. N.M. Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400013 Mumbai - 400020

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan, CIT D.R
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 4Section 92Section 92B

…Circle 7(1)(2) It was observed by the DRP that in A.Y. 2011-12 the issue was decided by the DRP in favour of the assessee by relying on certain decisions of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of (i). Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT/TPO (2010) 328 ITR 210 (Del); (ii). Whirlpool of India Vs. CIT [ITA No. 228/2015 & CM No. 5751/2015]; (iii). Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT & Ors (2016) 381 ITR 227 (Del); and (iv).Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2016) 237 Taxman 304 (Delhi), wherein it was held that in absence of an explicit arrangement between the assessee and its AEs…

Moet Hennessy India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 85/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Moet Hennessy India Private Ltd., Vs. Acit, Circle 5(1), Unit No.1903, Tower 2, 19Th Floor, New Delhi. Indiabulls Financial Centre, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400 013. (Pan : Aaccm4079L) (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sumit Mangal, Advocate Shri Saksham Singhal, Ca Revenue By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Ms. Nimita Pandey, Senior Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2019 Date Of Order : 09.04.2019 O R D E R Per Kuldip Singh:

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Mangal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144C

…xpayer is international transaction leading to the brand building of its AE has since been overruled by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del.) and subsequently in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT (2016) 328 ITR 210 (Del.) has categorically held that BLT is not a valid basis for determining the existence of international transaction or for that matter for computing the ALP of such international transaction involving AMP expenses, the order of TPO passed by making BLT as basis of the ALP adjustment is not sustainable in the eyes of law. 7 11. Ld. AR for th…

Star India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 11(1), Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5630/MUM/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Porus KakaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Singh
Section 14A

…restore the same to the file of the Assessing Officer for determining the said arm’s length compensation receivable by the assessee from its associated enterprise, in accordance with principles laid down in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v/s ACIT, Transfer Pricing (328 ITR 210 (Del.).” 11. At the outset, we proceed to decide ground no.1, while keeping aside for the time being the additional grounds raised by the Revenue. 12. Brief facts relating to the issue in ground no.1 are, in the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer on verifying the accounts of the assessee noticed that an amount of ` 58,41,53…

M/S Timex Group India Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 845/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92Section 92B

…d that they have entered into any agreement to enter into international transactions qua AMP expenses. 21. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del.) and subsequently in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT (2016) 328 ITR 210 (Del.) has categorically held that BLT is not a valid basis for determining the existence of international transaction or for that matter for computing the ALP of such international transaction involving AMP expenses. So, in these circumstances, the order of TPO passed by making BLT as basis of the ALP adjustment is not sustainable in the eyes…

Valvoline Cummins Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 527/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144CSection 92Section 928Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘I-1’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT, SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL and SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.527/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) M/s. Valvoline Cummins Pvt. Ltd., vs. DCIT, Circle 26 (1), 50/8, 1st Floor, Tolstoy Lane, New Delhi. Janpath, New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN : AAACW0287A) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate Shri Neeraj Jain, Advocate S/shri Abhishek Agarwal & Ramit Katyal, CAs REVENUE BY : Shri Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 12.11.2018 Date of Order : 26.11.2018 O R D E R PER KULDIP SIN…

M/S. Whirlpool of India Ltd, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 1254/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92Section 92B

…ing the provisions contained in trademark and trade name license agreement and after examining the provisions under section 92B to 92F of the Act and by following the decision rendered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT (2016) 328 ITR 210 (Del.) and decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case cited as CIT vs. B.C. Srinivasa Setty (1981) 128 ITR 294 (SC) and PNB Finance Ltd. vs. CIT (2008) 307 ITR 75 (SC), returned the following findings :- “47. For the aforementioned reasons, the Court is of the view that as far as the present appeals are concerned, the Revenue has been…

M/S. Sennheiser Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Gurgaon

ITA 269/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92B

…n’ble Delhi High Court has since overruled the LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) decision. When the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del.) and subsequently in Maruti Suzuki 11 India Ltd. v. CIT (2016) 328 ITR 210 (Del.) has categorically held that BLT is not a valid basis for determining the existence of international transaction or for that matter for computing the ALP of such international transaction involving AMP expenses, the order of TPO passed by making BLT as basis of the ALP adjustment is not sustainable in the eyes of law. 14. Furthermore, H…

Kaybee P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 10(1)(3) (Erstwhile Juridictional ITO 8(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground no.6 is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2166/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Kaybee Private Limited Ito-10(1)(3) 301, ‘A’ Wing, Solaris-1, Room No. 25 B, Ground Saki Vihar Road, Andheri (E), Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400072. Mumbai (Erstwhile Pan: Aaack1715H Jurisdictional Ito-8(2)(2), Mumbai. Appellant Respondent M/S Kaybee Private Limited Ito-10(1)(3) 301, ‘A’ Wing, Solaris-1, Room No. 25 B, Ground Saki Vihar Road, Andheri (E), Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400072. Mumbai (Erstwhile Pan: Aaack1715H Jurisdictional Ito-8(2)(2), Mumbai. Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Madhur Agarwal (Advocate) Respondent By : Shri Jayant Kumar With Shri V. Jenerdhanan (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing : 28.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.08.2018

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar with Shri V. Jenerdhanan (CIT-DR)
Section 254(1)Section 37Section 92ASection 92CSection 92C(2)Section 92C(3)Section 92F

…voking the provision for determination of ALP. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Moser Bear India Ltd. vs. ACIT 316 ITR 1 (Del), Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. vs. ACIT [2010] 328 ITR 210 (Delhi.). 5. On the contrary, the ld. DR for the Revenue submits that the submission made on behalf of the assessee is factually incorrect. Show-cause notice was issued by Assessing Officer vide notice dated 08.08.2012 and again on 30.12.2013. The assessee chose not to reply the show-cause notice. The Assessing Officer has no option except to pr…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 6021/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35DSection 43BSection 92C

…mparability factors that may contribute to the creation of value or the generation of returns derived by the MNE group from the exploitation of intangibles determining prices for relevant transactions. 5. The High Court in writ petition MSIL v ACIT/TPO (2010) 328 ITR 210 (Del), the Division Bench came to the following conclusion:- (i) The contractual obligations on MSIL under the agreement dated 12th December 1992 to use the joint trademark ‘Maruti Suzuki' as well as the parts manufactured and or sold by MSIL in India showed that SMC wanted to popularize its name in India at the cost of brand Maruti. (ii) It co…

Valvoline Cummins Private Limited vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax

ITA/158/2016HC Delhi31 Jul 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 260A

…issue.” Further, the AO/TPO was directed to follow the binding judgment of this Court. 12. It is the submission of Mr. Vohra that, as explained by this Court in Sony Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and later in Maruti Suzuki India Limited v. CIT (2016) 328 ITR 210 (Del), a basic requirement had to be fulfilled prior to commencing the exercise of determining the ALP of an international transaction. The Revenue had to discharge its onus of showing that there was an international transaction involving the Assessee and its AE with regard to the AMP expenses. If the Revenue failed to discharge this onus th…

Valvoline Cummins Private Ltd vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax

ITA-158/2016HC Delhi31 Jul 2017
Section 260A

…issue.” Further, the AO/TPO was directed to follow the binding judgment of this Court. 12. It is the submission of Mr. Vohra that, as explained by this Court in Sony Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and later in Maruti Suzuki India Limited v. CIT (2016) 328 ITR 210 (Del), a basic requirement had to be fulfilled prior to commencing the exercise of determining the ALP of an international transaction. The Revenue had to discharge its onus of showing that there was an international transaction involving the Assessee and its AE with regard to the AMP expenses. If the Revenue failed to discharge this onus th…

Rajesh Agarwal HUF, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

ITA 2183/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishirajesh Agarwal Huf, Vs. Ito, C/O. Akhilesh Kumar, Adv, Ward-2(2), Chamber No. 206-07, Ansal Ghaziabad “Satyam”, Rdc Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad Pan:Aaghr8866K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Akhilesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri FR Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 35Section 69Section 69C

…he additions in question may be deleted. He placed reliance on the following decisions :- i. Tin Box Co. Vs. CIT (2001) 249 ITR 216 (SC) ii. J.T. (India) Exports and others v. Union of India [2003] 262 ITR 269 (Del) (FB) iii. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Vs. ACIT 328 ITR 210 (Delhi) 4. The Ld. DR on the other hand opposed the contention of the Ld. AR that there is violation of principles of natural justice to the assessee by the authorities below. He placed reliance in this regard on the orders of authorities below. 5. Considering the above submissions in view of the orders of authorities below, we find that the AO…

ITO 9(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Intertoll Ics India P. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 7700/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2003-04
For Appellant: S/Shri Paras Savla & Harsh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 92C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई “केकेकेके” खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“K”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं सी. एन. "साद,"याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./7700/Mum/2010,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2003-04 Income tax Officer-9(2)(1) M/s. Intertoll ICS India Pvt. Ltd. Room No.225, 2nd Floor, Aayakar A-Wing, Business Square, 4th Floor, Bhavan,M.K. Road, Vs. Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai-400 020. Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400 903. PAN:AAACI 6853 Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue by:Shri Saurabh Deshpande Assessee by: S/Shr…

Heinz India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

Accordingly,we restore the issue to the file of the AO.He is directed to afford a reasonable opportunity of hearing the assessee before deciding the matter.Additional ground,raised by the assessee ...

ITA 1210/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2016AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri P.J. PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri G.M. Doss
Section 143Section 254(1)Section 92C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई खंडपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “केकेकेके” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“K”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं सी. एन. "साद,"याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7732/Mum/2012,िन धा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2008-09 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िन िनधा"रण िन धा"रण धा"रण वष" वष" M/s. Heinz India Private Limited Addl. CIT, Range-6(3) 7th Floor, ‘D’Shivsagar Estate, Dr. Annie 505, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Besant Road,Worli, Mumbai…

Heinz India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

Accordingly,we restore the issue to the file of the AO.He is directed to afford a reasonable opportunity of hearing the assessee before deciding the matter.Additional ground,raised by the assessee ...

ITA 7732/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri P.J. PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri G.M. Doss
Section 143Section 254(1)Section 92C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई खंडपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “केकेकेके” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“K”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं सी. एन. "साद,"याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7732/Mum/2012,िन धा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2008-09 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िन िनधा"रण िन धा"रण धा"रण वष" वष" M/s. Heinz India Private Limited Addl. CIT, Range-6(3) 7th Floor, ‘D’Shivsagar Estate, Dr. Annie 505, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Besant Road,Worli, Mumbai…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals are allowed in the above terms, but with no orders as to costs

ITA/110/2014HC Delhi11 Dec 2015
Section 260ASection 92C

…an amount of Rs. 154.12 Crores on account of compensation to be received from its AE for promoting the brand name of its AE." Order of the High Court in the writ petition 19. In the final order passed in the writ petition, i.e. MSIL v. ACIT/TPO (2010) 328 ITR 210 (Del.), the Division Bench of this Court came to the following conclusions: (i) The contractual obligations on MSIL under the agreement dated 12th December 1992 to use the joint trademark ‘Maruti Suzuki’ as well as the parts manufactured and/or sold by MSIL in India showed that SMC wanted to popularize its name in India at the cost of bran…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals are allowed in the above terms, but with no orders as to costs

ITA/710/2015HC Delhi11 Dec 2015
Section 260ASection 92C

…an amount of Rs. 154.12 Crores on account of compensation to be received from its AE for promoting the brand name of its AE." Order of the High Court in the writ petition 19. In the final order passed in the writ petition, i.e. MSIL v. ACIT/TPO (2010) 328 ITR 210 (Del.), the Division Bench of this Court came to the following conclusions: (i) The contractual obligations on MSIL under the agreement dated 12th December 1992 to use the joint trademark ‘Maruti Suzuki’ as well as the parts manufactured and/or sold by MSIL in India showed that SMC wanted to popularize its name in India at the cost of bran…

(Now known as Sony India Limited)

ITA/16/2014HC Delhi16 Mar 2015

…wledged and accepted tool to determine and ascertain routine and non-routine AMP expenses. He made reference to the cases of DHL and GlaxoSmithKline. Relying on the decision of the Delhi High Court in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. versus Addl. CIT/TPO [2010] 328 ITR 210 (Del), he held that the assessed was engaged in brand promotion by incurring AMP expenses. He made reference to the following table: 2015:DHC:2485-DB ITA 16/2014 & connected matters Page 14 of 142 F.Ys. 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 Sales (WSP) 69.6 89.4 118 169.4 252.5 366.2 451.23 S…

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi & Ors

Appeal is dismissed

ITA - 504 / 2008HC Delhi18 Nov 2011
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 92Section 92CSection 92D

…ar in any case could not control the quasi judicial discretion of the Assessing Officer. He also referred to another judgment of this Court 2011:DHC:5844-DB ITA 504 OF 2008 Page 15 of 22 in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT, 328 ITR 210 and particularly the following observations therein:- “Section 92CA of the Income-tax Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) provides that where the assessee has entered into an international transaction and the Assessing Officer considers it necessary or expedient to do so he may, with the previous approval of the Commissio…