Pr. CIT v. Amphenol Interconnect India Pvt. Ltd.

410 ITR 373High Court2019#11681 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 108(1)(e)Section 10TA(e)Section 10TA(g)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)

Issues it is cited on

far analysistransactional net margin methodcup methodmost appropriate methodsection 144c(5)comparable companiessection 92ca(3)transfer pricing adjustmenttnmmsection 144c(13)associated enterprisedispute resolution panel

Judgments citing Pr. CIT v. Amphenol Interconnect India Pvt. Ltd.

GBT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT,OSD, DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed as above

ITA 1764/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

…lowing decisions: i. Magneti Marelli Power Train India 389 1TR 469, ii. Gates India (P.) Ltd. [2024] 166 taxmann.com 29 (Del. Trib), iii. Arcient Technologies (Holdings) Ltd. [2019] 109 taxmann.com 47 (Del.Trb) iv. Amphenol Interconnect India (P.) Ltd. [2019] 410 ITR 373. 9. The Ld. Counsel further argued that the determination of ALP at 'NIL' was contrary to law as the Ld. TPO had not only exceeded his jurisdiction by applying cost benefit analysis for determination of ALP but also had not brought any comparable uncontrolled transaction on the record to determine the ALP at "NIL. To buttress his arguments, the L…

LANXESS INDIA P.LTD,THANE vs. DCIT CIR 1, THANE

In the result, the present appeal is partly allowed

ITA 971/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Dec 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Ms. ChandniFor Respondent: Ms. Samruddhi Dhananjay Hande
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 69CSection 92C

…copy of which is placed at pages 6 to 10 of Paper Book. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee has also pointed out that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court vide order Pr. CIT v. Amphenol Interconnect India (P.) Ltd. [2018] 91 taxmann.com 441/[2019] 410 ITR 373, relating to assessment years 2006-07 to 2008-09 had also dismissed appeal of Revenue and upheld the order of Tribunal on both the issues. The issues which were raised before the Hon'ble High Court were as under:— "(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in considering TNMM and MAM, without co…

ACIT CIR 7(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. MERCK LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1798/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm M/S. Merk Limited Godrej One, 8Th Floor, Dcit 7(2)(1) Pirojshanagar , Range 7(2)(1) Eastern Express Highway Vs. Mumbai Vikhroli(E) Mumbai-400 079 (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Merk Limited Acit Cir 7(2)(1) R.No. 573, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Shivsagar Estate A Dr. Bhavan, M.K. Road, A.B. Road, Worli, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 018 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace2616F Assessee By : Ms. Arativissanji, Ms. Astha Shah Revenue By : Shri. Samuel Pitta Date Of Hearing: 07.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.12.2022

For Respondent: Shri. Samuel Pitta
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 4Section 5Section 92CSection 92C(1)Section 92C(2)

…pted CUP, whereas for the other material, the ld. Transfer Pricing Officer has accepted the TNMM as the most appropriate method. She referred to the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in Amphenol Interconnect P Ltd [2018] 91 taxmann.com 441 (Bombay)/[2019] 410 ITR 373 (Bombay) to submit that Where assessee made imports and exports of finished goods and various adjustments were required to be made due to differences in FAR analysis, CUP would not be MAM to arrive at ALP of transaction; TNM method would be MAM. 019. The ld. DR submitted that the issue is squarely covered against the assessee in assessee‟s own c…

MERCK LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 7(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1525/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm M/S. Merk Limited Godrej One, 8Th Floor, Dcit 7(2)(1) Pirojshanagar , Range 7(2)(1) Eastern Express Highway Vs. Mumbai Vikhroli(E) Mumbai-400 079 (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Merk Limited Acit Cir 7(2)(1) R.No. 573, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Shivsagar Estate A Dr. Bhavan, M.K. Road, A.B. Road, Worli, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 018 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace2616F Assessee By : Ms. Arativissanji, Ms. Astha Shah Revenue By : Shri. Samuel Pitta Date Of Hearing: 07.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.12.2022

For Respondent: Shri. Samuel Pitta
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 4Section 5Section 92CSection 92C(1)Section 92C(2)

…pted CUP, whereas for the other material, the ld. Transfer Pricing Officer has accepted the TNMM as the most appropriate method. She referred to the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in Amphenol Interconnect P Ltd [2018] 91 taxmann.com 441 (Bombay)/[2019] 410 ITR 373 (Bombay) to submit that Where assessee made imports and exports of finished goods and various adjustments were required to be made due to differences in FAR analysis, CUP would not be MAM to arrive at ALP of transaction; TNM method would be MAM. 019. The ld. DR submitted that the issue is squarely covered against the assessee in assessee‟s own c…

ATLAS COPCO (INDIA) LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 816/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 1356/Pun/2015 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Atlas Copco (India) Limited Sevanagar, Mumbai-Pune Road, Dapodi, Pune-411 012. Pan : Aaaca4074D .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R. Murlidhar
Section 40

…iving adjustment on account of such material differences. In such circumstances, the price charged from AEs and non- AEs cannot be compared under the CUP method. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Pr. CIT Vs. Amphenol interconnect India Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 373 (Bom.) considered almost a similar situation in which there were differences in volumes and locations and the TPO had applied the CUP method for benchmarking the assessee’s international transaction. The Tribunal did not approve the application of the CUP method on account of such difference. When the Revenue preferred an appeal against the Tribu…

ATLAS COPCO (INDIA) LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1356/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 1356/Pun/2015 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Atlas Copco (India) Limited Sevanagar, Mumbai-Pune Road, Dapodi, Pune-411 012. Pan : Aaaca4074D .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R. Murlidhar
Section 40

…iving adjustment on account of such material differences. In such circumstances, the price charged from AEs and non- AEs cannot be compared under the CUP method. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Pr. CIT Vs. Amphenol interconnect India Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 373 (Bom.) considered almost a similar situation in which there were differences in volumes and locations and the TPO had applied the CUP method for benchmarking the assessee’s international transaction. The Tribunal did not approve the application of the CUP method on account of such difference. When the Revenue preferred an appeal against the Tribu…

DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EPCOS INDIA PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1783/KOL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jul 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Kolkata……..........….…..........…........Appellant Vs. M/S. Epcos India Pvt. Ltd............................………………..................................……………..........Respondent Kulia Kanchrapara Road Kalyani, Nadia Pin – 741 251 [Pan : Aaace 4000 H] Appearances By: Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. Cit D/R & Shri Supriyo Pal, Jcit, Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Smt. Rituparna Sinha, Fca & S.C. Giri C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 15Th, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 10Th, 2020 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 250

…r the CUP method. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in method. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Pr. CIT Pr. CIT v. Amphenol interconnect India (P.) Ltd. interconnect India (P.) Ltd. [2018] 91 taxmann.com 441/[2019] [2018] 91 taxmann.com 441/[2019] 410 ITR 373 (Bom.) considered almost a similar situation in which considered almost a similar situation in which there were there were differences in volumes and locations and the TPO had applied the volumes and locations and the TPO had applied the CUP method method for benchmarking the assessee's international transaction. the assessee's international tran…

M/S. CARRARO INDIA PVT.LTD, (AS A SUCCESSOR OF TURBO GEARS INDIA PVT.LTD),,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 1720/PUN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1719/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/S. Carraro India Pvt. Ltd. Pune (As A Successor Of Turbo Gears India Pvt. Ltd.,) B2/2, Midc, Ranjangaon, Pune 412220 Pan : Aaacc5292M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1720/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Carraro India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), (As A Successor Of Turbo Gears Pune India Private Limited) B2/2, Midc, Ranjangaon, Pune 412220 Pan : Aaacc5292M Appellant Respondent

Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “C”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1719/PUN/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/s. Carraro India Pvt. Ltd. Pune (as a successor of Turbo Gears India Pvt. Ltd.,) B2/2, MIDC, Ranjangaon, Pune 412220 PAN : AAACC5292M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1720/PUN/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Carraro India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), (as a successor of Turbo Gears Pune India Private Limited) B2/2, MIDC, Ranjangaon, Pune 412…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE vs. M/S. CARRARO INDIA PVT.LTD, (AS A SUCCESSOR OF TURBO GEARS INDIA PVT.LTD),, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 1719/PUN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1719/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/S. Carraro India Pvt. Ltd. Pune (As A Successor Of Turbo Gears India Pvt. Ltd.,) B2/2, Midc, Ranjangaon, Pune 412220 Pan : Aaacc5292M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1720/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Carraro India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), (As A Successor Of Turbo Gears Pune India Private Limited) B2/2, Midc, Ranjangaon, Pune 412220 Pan : Aaacc5292M Appellant Respondent

Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “C”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1719/PUN/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/s. Carraro India Pvt. Ltd. Pune (as a successor of Turbo Gears India Pvt. Ltd.,) B2/2, MIDC, Ranjangaon, Pune 412220 PAN : AAACC5292M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1720/PUN/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Carraro India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), (as a successor of Turbo Gears Pune India Private Limited) B2/2, MIDC, Ranjangaon, Pune 412…

Pr. CIT v. Amphenol Interconnect India Pvt. Ltd. (410 ITR 373) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax