Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 92B, Section 144C(13), Section 92C, Section 234B, Section 14A.

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

Q: How many judgments cite Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT?

499 judgments on BharatTax cite Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (374 ITR 118), spanning 2015 to 2026.

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 367,154 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 92B Section 144C(13)Section 92C Section 234B Section 14A Section 37 Section 37(1)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

bright line test amp expenditure section 92f functional analysis cost plus method tested party section 92c(3)section 92b transactional net margin method cup method benchmarking analysis comparable companies

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

DCIT 10(1)(1), Mumbai vs. India Medtronic P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 1800/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2018AY 2011-12

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajan Vora and Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar- DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 254(1)

…was prescribed under the Act and the Rules,that in absence of a machinery provision to benchmark the AMP expenses no adjustment could be made,that based on the principles of ‘bundled approach’,as emanated by the Delhi High Court in case of Sony India Limited (374 ITR 118)no addition should have been made.He further argued that the assessee had earned an operating margin of 5.39% which was higher than the margins earned by comparables,that it was only carrying out its own business and any benefits derived by the AEs were purely incidental in nature,the DRP had passed a non speaking order,that the TPO had not rejec…

India Medtronic P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 1246/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2018AY 2011-12

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajan Vora and Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar- DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 254(1)

Comm Vault Systems (India) Pvt.Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-1(2), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 343/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahm/S. Comm Vault Systems Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income (India) Private Limited Tax, Circle 1(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aaccc 3708 L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Darpan KirpalaniFor Respondent: Shri J. Siri Kumar, DR

Section 143(3)Section 234Section 234DSection 271(1)(C)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 disre…

M/S. Philips India Limited (Formerly Philips Electronics India Litd.), Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 12(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 2489/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2489/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S Philips India Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Circle-12(2), Kolkata (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) [Pan: Aabcp 9487 A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92D(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri A.T.Varkey, JM & Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A No. 2489/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/s Philips India Ltd. -vs- ACIT, Circle-12(2), Kolkata (formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) [PAN: AABCP 9487 A] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Arvind Sonde, Advocate For the Revenue : Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 19.03.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 04.04.2018 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. This appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order of the ACIT Circle-12(2), Kolkata,…

M/S Phillips India Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-12(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 612/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 612/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S Philips India Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Circle-12(2), Kolkata (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) [Pan: Aabcp 9487 A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92D(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A No. 612/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/s Philips India Ltd. -vs- ACIT, Circle-12(2), Kolkata (formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) [PAN: AABCP 9487 A] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Arvind Sonde, Advocate Shri Ketan Kr. Ved, Advocate Shri H.P. Srivastava, AR For the Revenue : Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 29.01.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 07.02.2018 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. This appeal filed by the assessee agains…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Adcock Ingram Limited, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1039/BANG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Vishnu Bagri, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Harinder Kumar, CIT - DR

Section 92B

…ew, aggregation of transaction is permissible under income tax Act and rules framed there under . In this regard, we may conveniently rely upon the recent judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 374 ITR 118/231 Taxman 113/55 taxmann.com 240 wherein it was held that aggregation of such transaction is permissible and relied upon the OECD Commentary in this regard. 80. The use of expression 'class of transaction', 'functions performed by the parties' in Section 92C(1) illustrates to the contrary, that the word 'transaction' IT(TP)A.1039 & 1078/Bang/20…

India Medtronic Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, 10(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1600/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

For Appellant: S/Shri Jehangir Mistry, Hiren ChandeFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar- DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 254(1)

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Epson India Pvt. Ltd

WP/12913/2017HC Karnataka09 Jan 2018

Bench: The Hon'Ble Dr.Justice Vineet Kothari

…ered in favour of assessee by the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v/s CANON INDIA PVT. LTD. Date of Order 09-01-2018 W.P.No.12913/2017 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax V/S M/s. Epson India Pvt. Ltd. 8/18 reported in 374 ITR 118 and a similar view was already taken by the Bengaluru Bench of the ITAT also in the case of M/s. ESSILOR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v/s DCIT as referred in paragraph 11.1 of their stay application, in fact the entire demand of Rs.22.17 Crores raised in the impugned orders by the authorities below deserved to be set aside. 9. He submitted…

Ts Tech Sun India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1943/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year : 2012-13 Ts Tech Sun India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, A-47, Lower Ground Floor, Circle-25(2), Hauz Khas, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaact4324M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate, Shri Neeraj Jain, Advocate, Shri Ramit Katyal, Ca & Shri Sahil Sharma, Ca Department By : Shri Niamrata Panday, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Niamrata Panday, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…CUP method for determining the ALP of the international transactions of Royalty and Technical services fee. It was argued by the assessee before their Lordships that aggregation approach was the correct method. After considering its earlier vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del) and Magneti Marelli Powertrain India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2016) 290 CTR (Del) 60, the Hon'ble High court remitted the matter to the TPO for considering the question of aggregation and application of the correct methods afresh in the hue of discussion made in the order. Following observations of the Hon’ble High Court merit mention in this…

M/S. Volvo India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 1353/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumarm/S.Volvo India Private Limited, Yalachahally Village, Tavarakere Post, Hoskote, Bangalore – 562 122. Pan: Aaacv 6747N … Appellant Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltu, … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 234CSection 234DSection 92C

…1068/2011 & 1070/2011 (Del HC) - CIT v. Dalmia Cement (P.) Ltd: 254 ITR 377 (Del) 15. Further reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd., 345 ITR 241 (Del) and CIT v. Reebok India Co. Ltd., 374 ITR 118 (Del). It was further contended that the AO/TPO cannot question the necessity of expenditure and reliance in this regard was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Lumax Industries Ltd. (ITA No.102/2014). Without prejudice to the above, he further contended that the cost incurred by the AE is not a relevant c…

ITO, WD-2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Data Core India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the Asst Year 2010-11 is allowed, appeal of the revenue for Asst Year 2011-12 is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee for the Asst

ITA 40/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 387/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S Data Core (India) Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- I.T.O., Ward-2(2), Kolkata [Pan: Aabcd 1188 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Sawhney, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjune, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A No. 387/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/s Data Core (India) Pvt. Ltd. -vs- I.T.O., Ward-2(2), Kolkata [PAN: AABCD 1188 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 40/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 I.T.O., Ward-2(2), Kolkata -vs- M/s Data Core (India) Pvt. Ltd. [PAN: AABCD 1188 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 10/Kol/2016 (Arising out of I.T.A No. 387/Kol/2015) Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/s Data Core (India) Pvt. Ltd. -vs- I.T.O., Ward-2(2), Kolkata [PAN: AABCD 1188…

M/S Data Core (India) Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-2(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the Asst Year 2010-11 is allowed, appeal of the revenue for Asst Year 2011-12 is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee for the Asst

ITA 387/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Sawhney, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjune, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

M/S. Lumax Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 6961/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2010-11 Lumax Industries Ltd., Jcit, Range- 4, B-85/86, Mayapuri Industrial New Delhi. Vs. Area, Phase-1, New Delhi. Pan : Aaacl1126D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…of the assessee in ITA No.102/2014 dated 28.10.2015 has not admitted the appeal of the revenue with respect to the determination of ALP of royalty relying on the decision of CIT Vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. 345 ITR 241 and CIT Vs. Sony Ericson Mobile Communication 374 ITR 118. The coordinate bench for AY 2008-09 in ITA No.4456/Del/2012 in assessee’s own case has held as under:- “19. In this regard, it is seen that during the year, royalty was paid by the Assessee to its AE on sales made using the trade mark of ‘Stanley’; that the assessee is a widely held listed company, a market leader. The payment of royalty was for…

M/S Bright Point India Pvt Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 123/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2012-13 Bright Point India Pvt. Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 20, G-9, Block B-1, New Delhi. Mohan Co-Operative Industrial Vs. Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Gulati, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 253(1)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-2”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2012-13 Bright Point India Pvt. Ltd., ACIT, Central Circle- 20, G-9, Block B-1, New Delhi. Mohan Co-operative Industrial Vs. Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi. PAN : AAACB6414G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Tarun Gulati, Adv. Department by : Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 06-09-2017 Date of pronouncement : 04-12-2017 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated…

Gruner India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 10(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 6801/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2013-14 Vs. Acit, Circle -10(2), New Delhi M/S. Gruner India Pvt. Ltd., 15, Dsidc, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-Ii, Scheme -1, New Delhi Pan : Aadcg2938H (Appellant) (Respondent) & S.A. No. 660/Del/2017 [In Ita No. 6801/Del/2017] Assessment Year: 2013-14 Vs. Acit, Circle -10(2), New Delhi M/S. Gruner India Pvt. Ltd., 15, Dsidc, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-Ii, Scheme -1, New Delhi Pan : Aadcg2938H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By S/Sh. H.P. Agrawal & Pancham Sethi, Ca Department By Sh. Sanjay Goyal, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 22.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 30.11.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.:

Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 92C

…segregation of these two transactions of payment of Royalty and Fees for technical services from the other international transactions, is justified? 5.3. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Sony Ericson Mobile Communication India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del), has dealt with the circumstances in which aggregation can be done in the context of AMP expenses. The principles laid down in this case are universally applicable and are not confined to the peculiar facts of that case alone. It has been held that 'transaction includes the S.A. No. 660/Del/2017 number of closely linked transactions.' Deal…

Toshiba India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 25(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed partly

ITA 6531/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Toshiba India Pvt. Ltd., 3Rd Vs. Acit, Circle 25(2), New Delhi Floor, Building No.10, Tower B, Dlf Cyber City, Phase –Ii, Gurgaon, Haryana Pan : Aabct4829N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Upvan Gupta, Adv. Respondent By Sh. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 21.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 30.11.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.:

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘I-2’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Toshiba India Pvt. Ltd., 3rd Vs. ACIT, Circle 25(2), New Delhi Floor, Building No.10, Tower B, DLF Cyber City, Phase –II, Gurgaon, Haryana PAN : AABCT4829N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Upvan Gupta, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr.DR Date of hearing 21.11.2017 Date of pronouncement 30.11.2017 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 26/09/2017 passed by the Ld. Assistant…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-6 vs. Matrix Cellular International Services Pvt. Ltd

ITA/484/2017HC Delhi22 Nov 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 260ASection 92C

…ITA-484/2017 Page 1 of 8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on: 22.11.2017 + ITA 484/2017 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 …. Appellant Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary Sr. Standing Counsel and Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Jr. Standing Counsel. versus MATRIX CELLULAR INTERNATIONAL SERVICES PVT. LTD. .... Respondent Through: Mr. Himanshu Sinha with Ms. Vrinda Tulshan, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J (ORAL) % 1. These a…

ITO, Bangalore vs. M/S Safran Engineering Services India Private Limited, Bangalore

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

ITA 451/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Raoit(Tp)A No.451/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11)

For Appellant: Ms.Neera Malhaotra, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri K.R.Vasudevan, Advocate

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BENGALURU BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.451/Bang/2015 (Assessment year: 2010-11) Income-tax Officer, Ward 6(1)(1), Bengaluru. … Appellant Vs. M/s.Safran Engineering Services India Pvt.Ltd. CSRIE, #32, Grape Garden, 17th ‘H’ Main road, VI Block, Koramangala, Bengaluru-560095. … Respondent PAN:AAAFC S9003D Appellant by : Ms.Neera Malhaotra, CIT(DR). Respondent by : Shri K.R.Vasudevan, Advocate. Date of hearing : 21/08/2017 Date of pronouncement : 20/11/2017 O R D E R Per INTURI RAMA RAO, AM…

Bmw India Private Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 1406/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2010-11 Bmw India Private Ltd. Vs. Dcit 7Th Floor, Tower-B, Building Circle-1(1) No. 8, Dlf Cyber City, Phase Gurgaon Ii, Gurgaon Pan:Aabcb7140C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Adv Department By : Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.11.2017 Order Per R.S. Syal, Vp: This Appeal By The Assessee Emanates From The Final Assessment Order Dated 24.02.2015 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144 C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961

For Appellant: Sh. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 92B(1)Section 92F

…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…

M/S. Avl India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4529/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Manoneet Dalal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Yadav, Sr. DR

Section 92B

…aggregated for the purpose of determining their ALP as a single transaction. Such `closely linked transactions’ cannot be benchmarked independent of each other. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del) has also held that bunching of interconnected and continuous transactions is permissible provided such transactions can be evaluated and adequately compared on aggregate basis. This proposition can be understood with the help of a simple illustration. If an assessee makes several transactions of sale of a particular product during a year to…