Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

374 ITR 118High Court2015#139 most cited

What is Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The existence of an international transaction for Advertising and Marketing Promotion (AMP) expenditure requires the revenue to discharge the burden of proof. An explanation inserted under Section 92B does not automatically make AMP expenditure an international transaction.

499

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · 374 ITR 118 · Section 92B · AMP expenditure · international transaction · bright line test · burden of proof · revenue

Also reported as

2015 SCC OnLine DEL 8083

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 144C(13)Section 92CSection 234BSection 14ASection 37Section 37(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

bright line testamp expendituresection 92ffunctional analysiscost plus methodtested partysection 92c(3)section 92btransactional net margin methodcup methodbenchmarking analysiscomparable companies

Judgments citing Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

M/S Nike India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is allowed and all other appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

ITA 3321/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Oct 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri N Venkatraman, K.R. Vasudevan, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neera Malhotra and Shri Muzaffar
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 148

…see-company on this issue are partly allowed.” Thus it is clear that the Tribunal has analysed all the precedence on this issue and by following the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT 374 ITR 118 has held that the AMP expenditure incurred by the assessee more than the comparable companies cannot lead to the conclusion that there exists any international transactions between the assessee and its foreign AE in the absence of any arrangement, understanding or agreement between the assessee and its AE to incur AMP expenses to promote the bran…

M/S.Nike India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is allowed and all other appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

ITA 739/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri N Venkatraman, K.R. Vasudevan, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neera Malhotra and Shri Muzaffar
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 148

…see-company on this issue are partly allowed.” Thus it is clear that the Tribunal has analysed all the precedence on this issue and by following the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT 374 ITR 118 has held that the AMP expenditure incurred by the assessee more than the comparable companies cannot lead to the conclusion that there exists any international transactions between the assessee and its foreign AE in the absence of any arrangement, understanding or agreement between the assessee and its AE to incur AMP expenses to promote the bran…

Nike India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is allowed and all other appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

ITA 804/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri N Venkatraman, K.R. Vasudevan, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neera Malhotra and Shri Muzaffar
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 148

…see-company on this issue are partly allowed.” Thus it is clear that the Tribunal has analysed all the precedence on this issue and by following the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT 374 ITR 118 has held that the AMP expenditure incurred by the assessee more than the comparable companies cannot lead to the conclusion that there exists any international transactions between the assessee and its foreign AE in the absence of any arrangement, understanding or agreement between the assessee and its AE to incur AMP expenses to promote the bran…

Nike India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is allowed and all other appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

ITA 330/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri N Venkatraman, K.R. Vasudevan, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neera Malhotra and Shri Muzaffar
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 148

…see-company on this issue are partly allowed.” Thus it is clear that the Tribunal has analysed all the precedence on this issue and by following the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT 374 ITR 118 has held that the AMP expenditure incurred by the assessee more than the comparable companies cannot lead to the conclusion that there exists any international transactions between the assessee and its foreign AE in the absence of any arrangement, understanding or agreement between the assessee and its AE to incur AMP expenses to promote the bran…

Danisco India P. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2846/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2846/Del/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year 2009-10 Danisco India Pvt. Ltd., 6Th Floor, Tower C, Dlf Cyber Greens, Sector-25A, Dlf City, Phase-Ii, Gurgaon-122002. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaacd8906D. Vs The Dcit, …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Circle-10(1), New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Harpreet Ajmani, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. M. Barnwal, Sr.DR
Section 144C(4)Section 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, "द"ल" "यायपीठ “आई-1”, नई "द"ल" म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I-1’, NEW DELHI सु"ी सुषमा चावला, उपा"य" एवं "ी "शांत मह"ष", लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, VP & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2846/Del/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year 2009-10 Danisco India Pvt. Ltd., 6th Floor, Tower C, DLF Cyber Greens, Sector-25A, DLF City, Phase-II, Gurgaon-122002. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant PAN-AAACD8906D. vs The DCIT, …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Circle-10(1), New Delhi. अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Sh. Harpreet Ajmani, A…

Jindal Stainless Ltd., Hisar vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 6518/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10] [Assessment Year: 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…be applied. The ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Para 3.9 of the revised OECD guidelines and further drew our attention to the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case Sony Eriscsson Mobile Communications India Pvt Ltd 374 ITR 118. Further reliance was placed on the decision of the co-ordinate Bench at Mumbai in the case of Essar Steel Ltd ITA No. 3727/MUM/2011. 23. Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the findings of the lower authorities and pointed out that a similar issue was decided by the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Ys 2007-08 and 2008-09. 24. We hav…

Jindal Stainless Ltd., Hisar vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 6517/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10] [Assessment Year: 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…be applied. The ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Para 3.9 of the revised OECD guidelines and further drew our attention to the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case Sony Eriscsson Mobile Communications India Pvt Ltd 374 ITR 118. Further reliance was placed on the decision of the co-ordinate Bench at Mumbai in the case of Essar Steel Ltd ITA No. 3727/MUM/2011. 23. Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the findings of the lower authorities and pointed out that a similar issue was decided by the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Ys 2007-08 and 2008-09. 24. We hav…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jindal Stainless Ltd., Haryana

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

ITA 5095/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10] [Assessment Year: 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…be applied. The ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Para 3.9 of the revised OECD guidelines and further drew our attention to the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case Sony Eriscsson Mobile Communications India Pvt Ltd 374 ITR 118. Further reliance was placed on the decision of the co-ordinate Bench at Mumbai in the case of Essar Steel Ltd ITA No. 3727/MUM/2011. 23. Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the findings of the lower authorities and pointed out that a similar issue was decided by the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Ys 2007-08 and 2008-09. 24. We hav…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jindal Stainless Ltd., Hisar

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

ITA 6539/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10] [Assessment Year: 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…be applied. The ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Para 3.9 of the revised OECD guidelines and further drew our attention to the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case Sony Eriscsson Mobile Communications India Pvt Ltd 374 ITR 118. Further reliance was placed on the decision of the co-ordinate Bench at Mumbai in the case of Essar Steel Ltd ITA No. 3727/MUM/2011. 23. Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the findings of the lower authorities and pointed out that a similar issue was decided by the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Ys 2007-08 and 2008-09. 24. We hav…

Vedanta Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 26(2), New Delhi

ITA 12/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: FixedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153

…that it is incorrect to segregate management consultancy fee as a separate class of transaction and is clearly in violation of law as was laid down by Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India Pvt. Ltd. 374 ITR 118. 15. The ld. counsel for the assessee further objected the direction for disallowance u/s 37 of the Act on protective basis as the same was never disputed by the Assessing Officer in the draft assessment order. 16. Per contra, strongly supporting the orders of the lower authorities, the ld. DR stated that the onus is upon the assessee to bring…

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

…10,838 Adjustment 2,85,10,127 Accordingly, without prejudice, the adjustment made by the TPO/DRP ought to be restricted to Rs. 2,85,10,127 as against Rs. 13,50,86,400. 7. The Ld. DR relied upon the decision of the Sony Ericson Mobile Communication India Ltd. 374 ITR 118. The Ld. DR further relied upon the decision of Toshiba Vs. DCIT being ITA No. 1101/Del/2015 & BMW India Pvt. Ltd. TS-88-ITAT-2017 (Del), both the decisions are of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. 8. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The assessee company is a wholly owned subsidiary company of ‘Haier Elect…

Commvault Systems India Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 160/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Commvault Systems Dcit, Circle 1(2) (India) Private Limited Vs. Hyderabad 5Th Floor, Plot No.39, Phase Ii Block A, Ananth Info Park Hitech City, Madhapur Hyderabad Pan: Aaccc3708L (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Ajeet Tolani Asessee By: Revenue By: Smt. Anjala Sahu, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 01/09/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 04/09/2020 Order Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The A.Y. 2012-13 Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 26.12.2016 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The I.T. Act, 1961. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company, Engaged In The Business Of Software Development Services & Unified Data Storage Solutions, E-Filed Its Original Return Of Income For The A.Y. 2012-13 On 11.10.2012 Admitting Total Income Of

For Respondent: Smt. Anjala Sahu, D.R
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 92(3)Section 92C

…agreement, it can be seen that the intention of the parties is clear that the assessee shall be a distributor of AE’s products in India. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericson Mobile Communications India (P) Ltd. v. CIT reported in (2015) , 374 ITR 118 (Del.) discussed the context and ruling in EKL Appliances Ltd, reported in 345 ITR 241 (Del.) to hold as follows: “CIT versus EKL Appliances Ltd - Disregarding actual transaction 147. Tax authorities examine a related and associated parties' transaction as actually undertaken and structured by the parties. Normally, tax authorities cannot disreg…

Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT Circle-22(2), New Delhi

The appeal of the taxpayer is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 9481/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144CSection 37(1)Section 92C

…ve erred applying the 'bright line' test as a tool to identify and benchmark the alleged AMP transaction which has no statutory mandate under the Act as laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi HC in the case of Sony Ericson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. [2015] 374 ITR 118 (Delhi). 20. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DRP/AO/TPO have erred in levying a further mark 5 ITA No.9481/Del./2019 up on the alleged AMP expenses incurred over and above the so- called 'bright-line' limit, stating that it tantamount to services being provided by Appellant to its AEs. GROUNDS AGAINST SUBSTAN…

Suzuki Motorcycles (I) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-24(2), New Delhi

ITA 7142/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92Section 928

…on facts and in law in applying Bright Line Test not appreciating that use of bright line test for the purpose of undertaking benchmarking analysis has been jettisoned by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications Pvt Ltd 374 ITR 118 20. Without prejudice that the assessing officer/TPO erred on facts and in law, in not appreciating that the AMP expenses incurred by the appellant was appropriately established to be at arm's length applying TNMM. 21. Without prejudice that the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in considering rebate amounting to Rs 27,43,804 and disco…

Beam Global Spirits & Wine India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), New Delhi

ITA 718/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Before Shri G.S. Pannu & Before Shri G.S. Pannu Before Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri K. Narasimha Charyshri K. Narasimha Chary Shri K. Narasimha Chary Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Gupta &For Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Senior DR
Section 251(1)

…luding the selling and distribution expenses while computing the AMP spend of the Appellant in complete disregard of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt.Ltd. vs. CIT ((2005) 374 ITR 118).” 3. Considering the plea of the assessee, which is not objected by the learned Senior DR, the aforesaid two Grounds of Appeal are permitted to be withdrawn. 3 ITA-718/Del/2020 4. This Interim Order is being issued in deference to the prayer of the assessee and the remaining Grounds of the captioned appeal subsist and shall come up for hearin…

Nikon India Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Gurgaon

Appeal are allowed

ITA 8753/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiita No. 8753/Del/2019 ( A.Y 2015-16)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 156Section 253(1)Section 271Section 274Section 92BSection 92C

…of excess profit from distribution of products while benchmarking the alleged international transaction of incurring excessive AMP expenditure as has been held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd.: 374 ITR 118(Del). 14. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO / DRP / TPO have erred in not granting quantitative / economic adjustments (such as non-payment of royalty / expenses incurred on new product launches) while quantifying arm’s length price of the alleged international transaction of AMP expenditure. 15. That on the facts…

Nikon India Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Gurgaon

Appeal are allowed

ITA 8752/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiita No. 8753/Del/2019 ( A.Y 2015-16)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 156Section 253(1)Section 271Section 274Section 92BSection 92C

…of excess profit from distribution of products while benchmarking the alleged international transaction of incurring excessive AMP expenditure as has been held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd.: 374 ITR 118(Del). 14. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO / DRP / TPO have erred in not granting quantitative / economic adjustments (such as non-payment of royalty / expenses incurred on new product launches) while quantifying arm’s length price of the alleged international transaction of AMP expenditure. 15. That on the facts…

Casio India Company Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-5(2), New Delhi

ITA 9312/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92BSection 92F

…CIT vs. Sony Ericsson Mobil Communication India Ltd. reported in (2015) 55 taxman.com 240 decided by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court vide which bright line approach has been discarded. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd. 17. v. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del.) and subsequently in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT (2016) 328 ITR 210 (Del.) has 12 ITA No.9312/Del./2019 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…

DCIT, CC-31, New Delhi vs. Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2601/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: H.K. Choudhary, CIT, DR
Section 92C

…concerned, the ld.CIT(A) upheld the order of the TPO to the extent of existence of international transaction after placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 374 ITR 118. He considered the amount of Rs.31,76,79,386/- received by the assesseee as business performance guarantee under the distribution segment to be the international transaction for AMP purposes. However, given that the TPO had used BLT to come to the conclusion that there existed an international transaction on account of AMP expenditure, the ld.CIT…

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2366/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: H.K. Choudhary, CIT, DR
Section 92C

…concerned, the ld.CIT(A) upheld the order of the TPO to the extent of existence of international transaction after placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 374 ITR 118. He considered the amount of Rs.31,76,79,386/- received by the assesseee as business performance guarantee under the distribution segment to be the international transaction for AMP purposes. However, given that the TPO had used BLT to come to the conclusion that there existed an international transaction on account of AMP expenditure, the ld.CIT…