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

ACIT, CC- 31, New Delhi vs. Pernod Richard 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 1607/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2020AY 2012-13

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, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 31, 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 1365/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2020AY 2012-13

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…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -9 vs. Valvoline Cummins Pvt. Ltd

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA/187/2020HC Delhi13 Mar 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

Section 260A

…ITA 187/2020 Page 1 of 5 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 187/2020 THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -9 ..... Appellant Through Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Madhura M.N., Advocates versus VALVOLINE CUMMINS PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr. Neeraj Jain with Mr. Aniket D. Agarwal, Advocates % Date of Decision: 13th March, 2020 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA J U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) CM APPL. 9279/2020 Keeping in view the ave…

M/S. Lenovo (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2444/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Mar 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…mitted before us that incurring of AMP expenses does not constitute an international transaction and in this regard filed before us a copy of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India P. Ltd. v. CIT, 374 ITR 118 (Del). Our attention was drawn to para 101 of the aforesaid decision in which the Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that once the TPO accepts and adopts TNM Method and then chooses to treat a particular expenditure like AMP as a separate international transaction without bifurcation and segregation, it would lead to an unusual and incongruous results…

Acer India Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the grounds relating to T

ITA 2837/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate & Shri Neeraj Jain &For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR ITAT)
Section 143(3)

…g support from the judgment of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of assessee in ITA No. 5140/DEL/2011. 10. At the outset, we have to state that the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt Ltd vs CIT 374 ITR 118 has discarded the BLT. The Hon'ble High Court, at para 120 held as under: "120. Notwithstanding the above position, the argument of the Revenue goes beyond adequate and fair compensation and the ratio of the majority decision mandates that in each case where an Indian subsidiary of a foreign AE incurs AMP expenditure should be subjected to the b…

Sabmiller India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 11(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1205/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri N.K. Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri Rajan R. Vora a/wFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBERAND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.1205/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2011–12) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–11(1)(2), Mumbai v/s Anheuser Busch InBev India Ltd. (Earlier known as SABMiller India Ltd.) Unit no.301/302, 3rd Floor ……………. Respondent Dynasty Business Park, “B” Wing Andheri Kurla Road, Aneheri (E) Mumbai 400 059 PAN–AAICS2238R ITA no.1738/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2011–12) Anheuser Busch InBev India Ltd. (Earlier known as SABMiller India Ltd.) Unit no.301/302,…

DCIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Hindustan Construction Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2432/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Hindustan Construction Co. Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd.,Hincon House, L.B.S. Vs. Income Tax-14(2)(1), Marg, Vikhroli (West), 4Th Floor, Aayakarbhavan, Mumbai-400083. New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaach0968B Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 The D.C.I.T.-14(2)(1), Hindustan Construction 432, Aayakarbhavan, 4Th Vs. Co. Ltd.,Hincon House, 11Th Floor, M.K. Marg, Floor,247 Park, L.B.S. Mumbai-400020. Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Aaach0968B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. H.P. Mahajani / Ms. Shweta Mahadik, ARsFor Respondent: Mr. Anand Mohan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…post amendment without considering the earlier decision of the tribunal to the contrary like Everest Kanto Cylinders Ltd. etc. and other decisions in the transfer pricing field upholding the retrospective amendments such as Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications 374 ITR 118 (Del), Marubeni India Pvt. Ltd. v. DIT 354 ITR 638 Delhi, IHG IT Services 23 ITR (Trib.) 608 (SB) Delhi, Everest Kanto Cylinders Ltd. 34 taxmann.com 19 (Mumbai Tribunal), Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd. (359 ITR 133) (Bom) and Patni Computers 215 taxman 108 (Bom). 25. Before us, the Ld. DR submits that the word ‘guarantee’ as the name suggests…

Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2351/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Hindustan Construction Co. Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd.,Hincon House, L.B.S. Vs. Income Tax-14(2)(1), Marg, Vikhroli (West), 4Th Floor, Aayakarbhavan, Mumbai-400083. New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaach0968B Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 The D.C.I.T.-14(2)(1), Hindustan Construction 432, Aayakarbhavan, 4Th Vs. Co. Ltd.,Hincon House, 11Th Floor, M.K. Marg, Floor,247 Park, L.B.S. Mumbai-400020. Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Aaach0968B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. H.P. Mahajani / Ms. Shweta Mahadik, ARsFor Respondent: Mr. Anand Mohan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…post amendment without considering the earlier decision of the tribunal to the contrary like Everest Kanto Cylinders Ltd. etc. and other decisions in the transfer pricing field upholding the retrospective amendments such as Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications 374 ITR 118 (Del), Marubeni India Pvt. Ltd. v. DIT 354 ITR 638 Delhi, IHG IT Services 23 ITR (Trib.) 608 (SB) Delhi, Everest Kanto Cylinders Ltd. 34 taxmann.com 19 (Mumbai Tribunal), Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd. (359 ITR 133) (Bom) and Patni Computers 215 taxman 108 (Bom). 25. Before us, the Ld. DR submits that the word ‘guarantee’ as the name suggests…

Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl. CIT., Special Range -8, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6813/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6813/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs Additional Commissioner Of 20Th -24Th Floors, Dlf Two Horizon Income Tax, Special Range-8 Center, Sector-13, Gurgaon, New Delhi-110002 Haryana-122002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacs5123K Assessee By : Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr & Date Of Hearing: 04.12.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.01.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR &
Section 144CSection 144C(10)Section 92C

…P/AO/TPO have erred in applying the ‘bright line’ test as a tool to 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). 13. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. DRP/AO/TPO have erred in levying a further mark-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. GROUND AGAINST ADJUSTMENT MADE IN RELATION TO INT…

Bombay Rayon Holdings Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO-9(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5986/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri. Madhur Agrawal, Shri Ajit KumarFor Respondent: Shri. Anand Mohan
Section 131Section 133Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 148Section 92(1)Section 92C(1)

…at each of the AE is i.e. assessee company and the foreign AE in Italy are separate entities assessable to tax in separate jurisdictions on independent basis. In this regard the TPO referred to honourable Delhi High Court decision in the case of Sony Ericsson 374 ITR 118 wherein the honourable High Court in paragraph 51 – 56 has deliberated on the difference between section 37 (1) and chapter X of the IT act the TPO noted that it was held by the honourable High Court that arm‟s-length procedure described in chapter X as applicable has to be given full application. Therefore impact of chapter X cannot be controlle…

M/S Msd Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1423/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, Adv &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 92Section 92C

…a Ltd. vs CIT (in short “Maruti Suzuki”) in ITA No.110/2014 order dated 11.12.2015 [2015] 64 taxmann.com 150 (Del.) and Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India (P.) Ltd. vs CIT-III (in short “Sony Ericsson”) आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No:- 1423/Del/2015 [2015] 374 ITR 118 (Delhi). It was again stressed by the learned AR that the onus was on the Revenue to establish that the expenditure resulted in an action in concert between assessee and its AE. Where the expenditure booked by the assessee was direct selling expenses, to spread awareness and to promote the sales then the said expenses were to be allowed as a…

Diageo India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 6(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1228/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) I.T.A. No. 1228/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year 2010-11) M/S. Diageo India Pvt. Acit-6(2)(2) Vs. Ltd. Room No. 504 Nicholas Piramal Tower Aayakar Bhavan Peninsula Corporate Park M.K. Road Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Mumbai-400 020. Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013. (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…f AMP expenses. It is seen that the TPO applied bright line test to find out the value of international transaction and then determined the ALP of AMP expenses. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (India)Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del) and other judgments has held that bright line test cannot be applied for determining the ALP of AMP expenses. The Hon'ble High Court in Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (supra) has restored the matter of determination of its ALP for a fresh determination in the light of guidelines laid down in such a case. It considered the distribution a…

Ipsos Research P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1361/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S Ipsos Research Pvt. Vs. Acit-2(2)(1), Mumbai Ltd. (In Which Synovate India Private Limited Has Been Amalgamated), Lotus Corporate Park, Unit No.1701, 17Th Floor, F Wing, Off Western Express Highway, Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400063 Pan No.Aaace 1157 B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Nishant Thakkar/Jasmin Annalsadvals Revenue By Shri Manjunath K/Anand Mohan, Citdr Date Of Hearing 29/11/2019 Date Of Pronouncement 11/12/2019

Section 144C(1)Section 144C(5)

…cial Bench in LG Electronic India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) insofar as it rejected applicability of bundled approach to AMP expenses is no longer good law in view of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Erricsson Mobile Communications India P, Ltd. [2015] 374 ITR 118 in paragraph 82 observes thus: 82. There is considerable tax literature and text that CUP Method, i.e. Comparable Uncontrolled Price Method, RP Method, i.e. Resale Price Method and CP Method, i. e. Cost Plus Method can be applied to a transaction or closely linked, of continuous transactions. Profits Split Method and TNM Method grouped as 'transa…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 1, New Delhi vs. Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 5026/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…d on the basis of report of an independent valuer, on cost plus 5% mark up. The first issue is whether it is open to the assessee to decide as to avail the service or not? The said issue stands decided by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Reebok India Company, 374 ITR 118 (Del.) which has also been applied by the Tribunal in para 81 at Page 15 ITA Nos.1308/Del/2015; 4913 & 5026/Del/2018; 7637/Del/2018; 7112 & 1944/Del/2017 51 of the order, to come to the findings that where the expenditure has been incurred for business purposes, the Assessing Officer cannot question requirement and quantum of expenditure.…

Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 3(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 4913/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…d on the basis of report of an independent valuer, on cost plus 5% mark up. The first issue is whether it is open to the assessee to decide as to avail the service or not? The said issue stands decided by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Reebok India Company, 374 ITR 118 (Del.) which has also been applied by the Tribunal in para 81 at Page 15 ITA Nos.1308/Del/2015; 4913 & 5026/Del/2018; 7637/Del/2018; 7112 & 1944/Del/2017 51 of the order, to come to the findings that where the expenditure has been incurred for business purposes, the Assessing Officer cannot question requirement and quantum of expenditure.…

M/S. Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1944/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…d on the basis of report of an independent valuer, on cost plus 5% mark up. The first issue is whether it is open to the assessee to decide as to avail the service or not? The said issue stands decided by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Reebok India Company, 374 ITR 118 (Del.) which has also been applied by the Tribunal in para 81 at Page 15 ITA Nos.1308/Del/2015; 4913 & 5026/Del/2018; 7637/Del/2018; 7112 & 1944/Del/2017 51 of the order, to come to the findings that where the expenditure has been incurred for business purposes, the Assessing Officer cannot question requirement and quantum of expenditure.…

Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 1, New Delhi

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

ITA 7637/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…d on the basis of report of an independent valuer, on cost plus 5% mark up. The first issue is whether it is open to the assessee to decide as to avail the service or not? The said issue stands decided by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Reebok India Company, 374 ITR 118 (Del.) which has also been applied by the Tribunal in para 81 at Page 15 ITA Nos.1308/Del/2015; 4913 & 5026/Del/2018; 7637/Del/2018; 7112 & 1944/Del/2017 51 of the order, to come to the findings that where the expenditure has been incurred for business purposes, the Assessing Officer cannot question requirement and quantum of expenditure.…

Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, Special Range- 1, New Delhi

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

ITA 7112/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…d on the basis of report of an independent valuer, on cost plus 5% mark up. The first issue is whether it is open to the assessee to decide as to avail the service or not? The said issue stands decided by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Reebok India Company, 374 ITR 118 (Del.) which has also been applied by the Tribunal in para 81 at Page 15 ITA Nos.1308/Del/2015; 4913 & 5026/Del/2018; 7637/Del/2018; 7112 & 1944/Del/2017 51 of the order, to come to the findings that where the expenditure has been incurred for business purposes, the Assessing Officer cannot question requirement and quantum of expenditure.…

Arivent Technologies Holdings Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1308/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…d on the basis of report of an independent valuer, on cost plus 5% mark up. The first issue is whether it is open to the assessee to decide as to avail the service or not? The said issue stands decided by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Reebok India Company, 374 ITR 118 (Del.) which has also been applied by the Tribunal in para 81 at Page 15 ITA Nos.1308/Del/2015; 4913 & 5026/Del/2018; 7637/Del/2018; 7112 & 1944/Del/2017 51 of the order, to come to the findings that where the expenditure has been incurred for business purposes, the Assessing Officer cannot question requirement and quantum of expenditure.…

M/S. Jones Lang Lasalle Property Consultants (I) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1648/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5584/Del/2011 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2007-08 बनाम Jones Lang Lasalle Property Acit Vs. Consultants (India) Pvt. Ltd. Circle 4(1), 1108-1110, Ashoka Estate, New Delhi. Barakhamba Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Pan No. Aaacl2089B

…Es. The Counsel furnished volumes of Paper Book which run into pages 1 to 2188. 20. Per contra, the DR strongly supported the findings of the TPO. It is the say of the DR that the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication 374 ITR 118 has held that when the AO/TPO accepts the comparables adopted by the assessee as a bundled transaction then any item of expenditure should not be taken out. It is the say of the DR that since in the case in hand the TPO has not accepted the aggregate approach then it is correct to treat the business service charges as a separate transaction fo…