How many judgments cite Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT?

220 judgments on BharatTax cite Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT (381 ITR 117), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 92B, Section 143(3), Section 92C, Section 144C(13), Section 144C(5), Section 234B.

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT

381 ITR 117High Court2016#408 most cited

What is Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The Bright Line Test (BLT) is not a recognized method under the Income-tax Act and Rules for benchmarking advertising, marketing, and promotion (AMP) expenses or for determining the existence of an international transaction or its Arm's Length Price. The Revenue must first establish the existence and price of an international transaction before seeking an ALP adjustment.

220

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT · 381 ITR 117 · Bright Line Test · BLT · AMP expenditure · international transaction · arm's length price · ALP · section 92B · section 92C · burden of proof · transfer pricing method

Also reported as

64 Taxmann.com 150237 Taxmann 256

Sections most often in play

Section 92B Section 143(3)Section 92C Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234B Section 271(1)(c)Section 92F

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

bright line test section 92f(v)amp expenditure section 92f cost plus method comparable uncontrolled price method section 92(1)section 92b functional analysis transactional net margin method section 92c(3)tested party

Judgments citing Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT

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

ITA-158/2016HC Delhi31 Jul 2017

Section 260A

…ITA No.608/Del/2015 for the Assessment Year (‘AY’) 2010-11. 2. While admitting the appeal on 19th February 2016, the following question was framed for determination by this Court: “Whether in light of the decision in Maruti Suzuki Ltd. v. CIT (2016) 381 ITR 117 (Del) the ITAT was justified in holding that 2017:DHC:4071-DB ITA 158/2016 Page 2 of 8 there was an international transaction between the Assessee and its Associated Enterprise with regard toadvertising, marketing and publicity (AMP) expenses and in remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer/Transfer Pricing Officer for determini…

M/S Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 892/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR &

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 263Section 80ISection 92C

…n manufacturing and selling business at 42.66% resulting in disputed Transfer Pricing Adjustment of Rs.146.19 crores. The Ld. AR during the hearing clearly stated that the TPO was not dealt with the judgment in case of Sony Ericson 374 ITR 118 & Maruti Suzuki 381 ITR 117 passed by the Hon'ble High Court. Before the DRP these two decisions were placed by the assessee but DRP has not taken into consideration of Maruti Suzuki and held that existence of international transaction of AMP solely on basis of Sony Ericson and other decisions referred therein. The TPO presumed existence of international transaction of AMP…

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

ITA 3811/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2004-05 Ay: 2005-06

For Appellant: Mr. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri T.M. Shivakumar, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 92C(2)

…r Honours. 5. In this regard, it is most humbly submitted that the CIT (A) is well reasoned and in tune with the recent developments in law on the issue of AMP expenses. Hon’ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court, in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. vs. CIT 381 ITR 117, Whirlpool of India Ltd. vs. DCIT 381 ITR 154 and Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 381 ITR 227 has clearly laid down the jurisprudence on the issue of AMP expenses undertaken by a manufacturer and hence are squarely applicable to Appellant’s case as well. 6. Such decisions have been followed by the Hon’ble Delhi Tribunal in the c…

Pernod Richard India Pvt. Ltd, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 3525/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2004-05 Ay: 2005-06

For Appellant: S/Shri Deepak Chopra,Adv.,Harpreet Singh, Adv., Anmol Anand, AdvFor Respondent: S/Shri T.M. Shivakumar, CIT DR, B. Ramanjaneyulu, Sr.DR

Section 115JSection 92C(2)

Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 2770/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2004-05 Ay: 2005-06

For Appellant: Mr. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri T.M. Shivakumar, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 92C(2)

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Pernod Ricard (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

ITA 2530/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2004-05 Ay: 2005-06

For Appellant: Mr. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri T.M. Shivakumar, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 92C(2)

M/S. Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 789/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Smt Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 43(1)Section 80Section 80ISection 92C

…ed existence of international transaction of AMP by adopting Bright Line Test ('BIT') and alleged that AE was benefited by way of increased business. The Ld. AR further submits that though the DRP had benefit of both Sony Ericson 374 ITR 118 and Maruti Suzuki 381 ITR 117 decisions of Hon'ble High court. The Ld. AR submits that the DRP deliberately ignored said decision in Maruti Suzuki and upheld existence of international transaction of AMP solely on basis of paras 52 of Sony Ericsson and other decisions i.e., presumption which was directly contrary to evidence/facts. The Ld. AR further submitted that no factual…

DDIT, Dehradun vs. Bg Exploration & Production India Ltd., Mumbai

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2227/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishidy. Director Of Income Tax, Bg Exploration & Production India International Taxation, Ltd, Dehradun Bg House, Vs. Lake Boulevard Road, Hiranandani Business Park, Powai, Mumbai Pan: Aaace4569K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Swain, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92

…tech India Limited V ACIT 104 /del/2012 e. Dresser Rand India Co V ACIT 8753/Mum/2010 f. Ericsson India P Ltd V DCIT 141/del/2011 g. GE Money Financial services P Ltd V ACIT 5882/Del/2010 h. Peri India P Ltd V DCIT ( Mum ITAT) i. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd V CIT 381 ITR 117 j. Sony Ericsson mobile Communication India P Ltd V CIT 374 ITR 118 k. CIT V Lumax Industries Limited ITA No 102/2014 l. Demag Cranes & Components Limited V DCIT 1683/pn/2011 m. Cummins India limited V Addl CIT ITA No 1616/Pn/2011 69. we have carefully considered the rival contentions and also perused the order of the Ld. assessing officer and d…

Rayban Sun Optics India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 891/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri J. S. Reddy & Shri Amit Shuklaassessment Year : 2009-10 Rayban Sun Optics India Ltd., Dcit, Circle- 15(1), 7Th Floor, Tower 9B, New Delhi. Vs. Dlf Cyber Greens, Gurgaon. Pan : Aaacb 2586 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2010-11 Rayban Sun Optics India Ltd., Dcit, Circle- 21(1), 7Th Floor, Tower 9B, New Delhi. Vs. Dlf Cyber Greens, Gurgaon. Pan : Aaacb 2586 M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri T. M. Shivakumar, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-2”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J. S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2009-10 RayBan Sun Optics India Ltd., DCIT, Circle- 15(1), 7th Floor, Tower 9B, New Delhi. Vs. DLF Cyber Greens, Gurgaon. PAN : AAACB 2586 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2010-11 RayBan Sun Optics India Ltd., DCIT, Circle- 21(1), 7th Floor, Tower 9B, New Delhi. Vs. DLF Cyber Greens, Gurgaon. PAN : AAACB 2586 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Nageswar Rao, Adv. Respondent by : Shri T. M. Shivakumar, CIT(DR) Date of hearin…

Cairn Uk Holding Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result ground No. 5 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1669/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Puri CIT

Section 143(3)Section 144

…P a g e | 1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―D‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1669 /Del/2016 (Assessment Year: 2007-08) Crain U K Holdings V Deputy Commissioner of Limited Income Tax ( International s 50 Lothian Road Taxation) – Circle 1(2)(1) . Edinburgh , Scotland New Delhi EH39BY PAN : AACCC9135H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Percy Pardiwala Sr. Adv Shi P Maheshwari, CA Ms. Aarti Sathe, Adv Revenue by: Shri Sanjay Puri CIT Shri Anuj Arora CIT DR Date of Hearing 19/12/2016 Date of pronouncement 09/03/2017 O…

M/S. Sis Live, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result the ground No

ITA 1313/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishisis Live Acit, C/O. Srbc & Associates Llp, Central Circle-17, Room No. Vs. Golf View Corporate Tower B, 356, E-2, Sector-42, Sector Road, Gurgaon Pan:Abrfs4787L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri NC Swain, CIT DR (OSD)

Section 142(1)

…ue authorities have miserably failed to discharge this onus and hence on this ground also the TP adjustment is to be struck down. Reliance is placed on the recent decisions of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v CIT, (2016) 381 ITR 117 and CIT v Whirlpool of India Pvt. Ltd., (2016) 381 ITR 154. The basic flaw in the approach of the TPO is that despite accepting the fact that the Appellant is following cash system of accounting and the fact that the Appellant had suo-moto not claimed expenses in respect of the said international transactions during the relevant assessment year,…

Nippon Paint India Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

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

ITA 779/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.779/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Respondent: Mr.Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92C(1)

…he application of Bright Line Test is not a correct method as per the Indian TP Regulations to bench mark the transactions pertaining to AMP expenses. The Ld.AR relied on the following decisions in the cases of – • Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs. CIT ([2016] 381 ITR 117), • Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications Vs. CIT([2015] 374 ITR 118) Goodyear India Ltd., Vs. DCIT (ITA No.5650/Del/2011, 6240/Del/2012 and 916/Del/2017. • Delhi High Court in Whirlpool India Ltd. (ITA No.610 of 2014 & 228 of 2015). • Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT Delhi High Court ITA No.643, 675 to 677 of 2014, 165, 166 and 950…

Solar Turbines India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 15(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1075/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Saktijit Deyआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 1075/Mum./2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011–12) Solar Turbines India Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As Turbomach India P. Ltd.), 401, 402, 403, 4Th Floor ……………. Appellant Powai Plaza, Hiranandani Business Park Powai, Mumbai 400 076 Pan – Aabct7422R V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle–15(3)(2), Aayakar Bhawan ……………. Respondent 101, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 020 निर्धाररती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Arvind Sonde A/W Shri Ketan Ved रधजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri N.K. Chand सुिवधई की तधरीख / आदेश घोषणध की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing – 05.10.2016 Date Of Order – 02.01.2017 आदेश / Order शक्तिजीि दे, न्याययक सदस्य के द्वारा / Per Saktijit Dey, J.M.

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde a/wFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

…e submitted, there being no international transaction in terms of section 92B of the Act, hence, there is no question of determining arm's length price notionally. In this context, he relied upon the following decisions:– 1. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v/s CIT, 381 ITR 117; 2. Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) (P.) Ltd. v/s ACIT 381 ITR 227 3. L'Oreal India (P.) Ltd. v/s DCIT, 49/473 (Trib.) 10. Learned Departmental Representative submitted, even if the transaction value is zero still arm's length price has to be computed since the assessee and the A.E. are related parties. He submitted, since the A.E. has no P.E. in…

Hero Motocorp Limited, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1545/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Sawain, CIT DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…actions is desirable and not merely permissible. Reliance in this regard is also placed on the following decisions wherein Courts have upheld the benchmarking of international transactions applying TNMM on an aggregate basis: i. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd vs CIT 381 ITR 117 ii. CIT vs Lumax Industries Ltd (ITA No 102/2014) (Delhi High Court) iii. Daksh Business Process Services Pvt Ltd vs DCIT (ITA No 2666/Del/2014) iv. Toyota Kirloskar Auto Parts Pvt Ltd vs ACIT (ITA No 1356/Bang/2011) Hero MotoCorp Limited Vs. JCIT & DCIT Vs. Hero MotoCorp Ltd. ITA Nos. 1545/Del/2015 and 2424/Del/2015 (AY 2010-11) ITA No. 1609/De…

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

In the result, we set aside the ground No

ITA 2614/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Pardasani, CAFor Respondent: Shri N. S. Swain, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92D

…rrive at the correct margin. 10. Ground No.7-14: This issue has been dealt in para 32-33 at pages 48 to 68 of the Tribunals order. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Vs CIT reported in 381 ITR 117 while setting aside the issue of AMP expenses. Respectfully following the same, we set aside the issue to the file of Ld. A.O. for determining the AMP expenses in the light of the ratio laid down by the 10 I.T.A.No.2614/Del/2014 Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (supra) followed by various other judgements…

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 1482/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Manoj Pardasani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amrendra Kumar, CIT/DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…on’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki and Sony Erriction held that it is not an international transaction and bright line test cannot be applied in view of it and it does not have sanction of IT Act & Rules. Recently Hon’ble Delhi High Court in 381 ITR 117 in Maruti Suzuki India Limited V CIT has held as under : “41. Having considered the above submissions the court proceeds to analyse the decision in Sony Ericsson to determine if it conclusively answers the issue concerning the existence of an international transaction as a result of incurring of AMP expenditures by an assessee. 42. As already no…

ACIT 5(1), Mumbai vs. Cadbury India Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5876/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2016AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: S/Shri N.K.Chand-CIT

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…the bona fide requirements of its own business, that the assessee was risk bearing entity,that the expenditure was incurred to promote its own products, that it had not advertised the brand owned by its AEs.He relied upon the cases of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.(64 Taxmann.com 150), Honda Ciel Power Products (64Taxmann.com328),Whirlpool of India Ltd.(64 Taxmann.com 324),delivered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court.Referring to the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India Private Ltd.(231 taxmann 113),he stated that matter should not be remanded back to the file of the TPO in view of the said decision. He furthe…

L'Oreal India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

ITA 7714/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 May 2016AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar and Ms. Jasmin AmalsadualaFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand-CIT

Section 254(1)Section 92

…was of rupees for 47.84 crores and that it had distribution turnover of Rs.113.33 crores,that the expenditure was incurred to promote its own products, that it had not advertise the brand owned by its AEs. He relied upon the cases of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.(64 Taxmann.com 150), Honda Ciel Power Products (64Taxmann.com328),Whirlpool of India Ltd.(64 Taxmann.com 324), delivered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court.Referring to the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India private limited(231 taxmann 113),he stated that matter should not be remanded back to the file of the TPO in view of the said decision. The D…

Le Passage to India Tours & Travels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA No.1528/Del/2015 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1529/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘F’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2009-10] Le Passage to India Tours & Travels Pvt. DCIT, Ltd. Circle-4(1), E-29, Hauz Khas, New Delhi New Delhi PAN-AAACL8370K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2010-11] Le Passage to India Tours & Travels Pvt. DCIT, Ltd. Circle-4(1), E-29, Hauz Khas, New Delhi New Delhi PAN-AAACL8370K Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Ms. Deepika Aggarwal Revenue by Shri Sanjay I Bara CIT-DR Date of Hearing 16/07/2019 Date of…

Le Passage to India Tours & Travels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA No.1528/Del/2015 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2491/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

Section 143(3)