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 367,154 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 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

Reebok India Company, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 954/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.M. Shivakumar, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C

…its level and remitted the matter to the file of AO/TPO for a fresh determination. 5. The ld. DR, similar to Nikon’s case (supra), relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del) in which AMP expenses have been held to be an international transaction and the matter of determination of its ALP has been restored. It was contended that the instant assessee is a part of the batch of appeals decided by the Hon’ble High Court in the lead case of Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (supra). He also relied on a later judg…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Reebok India Company, New Delhi

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

ITA 1620/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.M. Shivakumar, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C

…its level and remitted the matter to the file of AO/TPO for a fresh determination. 5. The ld. DR, similar to Nikon’s case (supra), relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del) in which AMP expenses have been held to be an international transaction and the matter of determination of its ALP has been restored. It was contended that the instant assessee is a part of the batch of appeals decided by the Hon’ble High Court in the lead case of Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (supra). He also relied on a later judg…

Molson Coors Cobra India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(1), Mumbai

Accordingly, Ground no.2 with its sub-grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7576/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Riaj Thingna and Ms.Vaishali Mane-ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande-DR
Section 254(1)

…nts. 5. At the outset, Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that the impugned order being dated 10.9.2012 by the CIT (A) was passed prior to the judgment of the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt Ltd vs CIT [374 ITR 118] and Maruti Suziki India Limited vs. CIT in ITA No. 110/ 2014 and ITA 710/2015, dated 11th December, 2015 and the coordinate Bench decision of the ITAT in the case of M/s. Johnson & Johnson Limited vs. ADIT vide I.T.A. No.829/M/2014 (AY 2009-2010), dated 07.01.2016. Summarising the above, Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ground no.2…

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…

Louis Vuitton India Retail Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 775/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, Shri Gaurav GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Peeyush Jain, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…d by the AO alone. This part of the Instruction is in line with the statutory mandate contained in sub-section (2A) and (2B) of section 92CA. 12 16. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Sony Ericson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del) has decided this very issue in favour of the Revenue by holding in para 47 that: `The majority decision of the Tribunal in L.G. Electronics India Pvt Ltd. (supra) has rightly drawn a distinction between sub-section (2B) and sub- section (2A) to Section 92CA of the Act. Sub-section (2A) was inserted in 2011, i.e. nearly one year before ins…

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)

…ected on determination of arm's length price of an international transaction before seeking approval of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax. This view is also fortified by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the Sony Ericson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd.(374 ITR 118) in the following words: "44. On careful analysis of sub-section (2B) to Section 92CA of the Act, the following position emerges: (a) There should be reference under sub-section (1) to Section 92CA by an Assessing Officer to the TPO in respect of an international transaction. (b) The reference should be with prior approval of the Commissioner. (c…

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 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 of 2015. • Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. vs. DCIT Delhi High Cour…

M/S. Swaro vs. Ki India Private Limited, New Delhi

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

ITA 5622/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2005-06 Swarovski India Private Limited, Vs. Acit, 1A-1D, Vandhana Building, Circle-7(1), 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aabcs4767J Assessment Year : 2005-06 Dcit, Vs. Swarovski India Private Circle-7(1), Limited, New Delhi. 1A-1D, Vandhana Building, 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi. Pan: Aabcs4767J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj PardasaniFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR

…eration, in some of which the transaction of AMP has been held as an international transaction, in others as not an international transactions, while still in some others, the matter has been restored for fresh Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del), in which the AMP expenses as an international transaction has been accepted. In another judgment dated 28.1.2016 of the Hon’ble Delhi (for the AY 2010-11), the question as to whether AMP expenses is an international transaction, has been restored for a fresh determination. There are three recent judgments of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court,…

M/S. Swaro vs. Ki India Private Limited, New Delhi

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

ITA 5621/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Manoj PardasaniFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR

…international transaction, in others as not an international transactions, while still in some others, the matter has been restored for fresh consideration in the light of the judgment in Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del), in accepted. In another judgment dated 28.1.2016 of the Hon’ble Delhi (for the AY 2010-11), the question as to whether AMP expenses is an international transaction, has been restored for a fresh determination. There are three recent judgments of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, viz., Rayban Sun Optics India Ltd. VS. CIT (dt. 14.9.2016), Pr…

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

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

ITA 5497/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2005-06 Swarovski India Private Limited, Vs. Acit, 1A-1D, Vandhana Building, Circle-7(1), 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aabcs4767J Assessment Year : 2005-06 Dcit, Vs. Swarovski India Private Circle-7(1), Limited, New Delhi. 1A-1D, Vandhana Building, 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi. Pan: Aabcs4767J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj PardasaniFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR

…eration, in some of which the transaction of AMP has been held as an international transaction, in others as not an international transactions, while still in some others, the matter has been restored for fresh Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del), in which the AMP expenses as an international transaction has been accepted. In another judgment dated 28.1.2016 of the Hon’ble Delhi (for the AY 2010-11), the question as to whether AMP expenses is an international transaction, has been restored for a fresh determination. There are three recent judgments of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court,…

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

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

ITA 5496/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Manoj PardasaniFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR

…international transaction, in others as not an international transactions, while still in some others, the matter has been restored for fresh consideration in the light of the judgment in Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del), in accepted. In another judgment dated 28.1.2016 of the Hon’ble Delhi (for the AY 2010-11), the question as to whether AMP expenses is an international transaction, has been restored for a fresh determination. There are three recent judgments of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, viz., Rayban Sun Optics India Ltd. VS. CIT (dt. 14.9.2016), Pr…

Le Passage to India Tour & Travels (P) Ltd vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is partly allowed in the above terms

ITA/369/2016HC Delhi12 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…ITAs 368 & 369 of 2016 Page 1 of 4 $~1 & 2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Decided on 12.01.2017 + ITA 368/2016 LE PASSAGE TO INDIA TOUR & TRAVELS (P) LTD.... Appellant Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Adv. with Mr. Neeraj Jain and Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal, Advs. versus THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.... Respondent Through: Mr. Ashok Manchanda and Mr. Raghvendra Singhj, Advs. + ITA 369/2016 LE PASSAGE TO INDIA TOUR & TRAVELS (P) LTD.... Appellant Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Adv. with Mr. Neeraj Jain and Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal, Advs. versus THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.... Respondent Thr…

Le Passage to India Tour & Travels (P) Ltd vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is partly allowed in the above terms

ITA/368/2016HC Delhi12 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…ITAs 368 & 369 of 2016 Page 1 of 4 $~1 & 2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Decided on 12.01.2017 + ITA 368/2016 LE PASSAGE TO INDIA TOUR & TRAVELS (P) LTD.... Appellant Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Adv. with Mr. Neeraj Jain and Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal, Advs. versus THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.... Respondent Through: Mr. Ashok Manchanda and Mr. Raghvendra Singhj, Advs. + ITA 369/2016 LE PASSAGE TO INDIA TOUR & TRAVELS (P) LTD.... Appellant Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Adv. with Mr. Neeraj Jain and Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal, Advs. versus THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.... Respondent Thr…

Asb International Pvt. Ltd., Thane vs. ACIT Cir-1, Kalyan

ITA 2137/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jan 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Ms. Karshima Phatarphekar & Shri Harsh ShahFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand-CIT
Section 143Section 254(1)Section 92

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ “ “ “ केकेकेके” ” ” ” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“K”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, , , , शि"जीत डे एवं शि"जीत डे शि"जीत डे, "याियक शि"जीत डे "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Saktijit Dey,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/ ITA(TP)/No.2137/Mum/2016 : िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 615/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92D

…ms Ltd. Vs DCIT in ITA No. 426 and 1131/Pn/2006 " Bharti Airtel Ltd. Vs ACIT in " Micro Ink Ltd. Vs Addl. CIT in ITA No. 2873/Ahd./2010 " CIT Vs M/s Cotton Naturals (I) Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 233/2014 " Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT 374 ITR 118 " CIT Vs EKL Appliances in ITA No. 1068/2011 & 1070/2011 " Allcargo Global Logistics Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA Nos. 4909 & 4910/Mum/2012 " AWB India (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT in ITA No. 6480/Del/2012 " DCIT Vs Air Liquide Engineering India (P.) Ltd. in ITA Nos. 1040 & 1159/Hyd/2011 & 1408/Hyd/2010 " Sony India (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT 114 ITD 448 (Del) " Kusum Healthca…

Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 302/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92D

…ms Ltd. Vs DCIT in ITA No. 426 and 1131/Pn/2006 " Bharti Airtel Ltd. Vs ACIT in " Micro Ink Ltd. Vs Addl. CIT in ITA No. 2873/Ahd./2010 " CIT Vs M/s Cotton Naturals (I) Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 233/2014 " Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT 374 ITR 118 " CIT Vs EKL Appliances in ITA No. 1068/2011 & 1070/2011 " Allcargo Global Logistics Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA Nos. 4909 & 4910/Mum/2012 " AWB India (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT in ITA No. 6480/Del/2012 " DCIT Vs Air Liquide Engineering India (P.) Ltd. in ITA Nos. 1040 & 1159/Hyd/2011 & 1408/Hyd/2010 " Sony India (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT 114 ITD 448 (Del) " Kusum Healthca…

Gruner India Privete Limited vs. Director of Income Tax (Transfar Pricing )-1

The appeal is partly allowed

ITA/708/2016HC Delhi20 Dec 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 260ASection 92C

…egation or desegregation, as the case may be concerned, we notice that there can be no strait jacket or inviolable rule in this regard. The recent judgment of this Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India (P) Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income Tax (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del) stated that aggregation of such transaction is permissible and relied upon the OECD Commentary in this regard. At the same time the observations are not in fact determinative or conclusive. The Court was careful to leave the issue open for examination having regard to the facts of each case. In other words, as to whether the assessee’s clai…

Volvo India Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 384/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri. P. J. Pardiwala, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri. G. R. Reddy, CIT-DR-I
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…sible only when the transactions are closely related to IT(TP)A No.384/Bang/2013 Page 14 of 14 each other and reliance in this regard can be placed on the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. CIT 374 ITR 118 and Punjab Haryana High Court in the case Knorr Bremse India (P) Ltd., Vs. Asst. CIT 2016 (380 ITR 307). It is not the case of the appellant that these transactions are closely linked with the other transactions and therefore the submission that these transactions should be bundled with other transactions cannot be accepted. 14. In the result, t…

Panasonic India Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as 10

ITA 479/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 479/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-2008. M/S. Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Spic Building Annexe, 6Th Floor, Income Tax, 88, Mount Road, Company Circle V(1) Guindy, Chennai. Chennai 600 032. [Pan Aadcp 9391B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Dinodia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri.Durai Pandian, Sr. A.R
Section 271(1)Section 92BSection 92F

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘ D’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज", लेखा सद"य के सम" । [BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 479/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2007-2008. M/s. Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of SPIC Building Annexe, 6th floor, Income Tax, 88, Mount Road, Company Circle V(1) Guindy, Chennai. Chennai 600 032. [PAN AADCP 9391B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shr…

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Asst CIT RG 1(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 147/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Amit Shuklait(Tp)A No.: 1373/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2009-10) ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Vs Dy. Cit- 1(3), Room No.564, Syngenta India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, S No. 110/11/3, Amar Paradigm M K Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Baner Road, Pune -411 045 स्थमी रेखा सिं. Pan: Aaecs 9424 P अऩीराथी (Appellant) प्रत्मथी (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri N K Chand
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 253(1)Section 92C(2)

…at for other transactions TNMM should be adopted and for „royalty‟, CUP method. In any case, the assessee has placed strong reliance on the decision of the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications vs. CIT, reported in [2015] 374 ITR 118 and going by the ratio of the said judgment then the royalty payment will get subsumed in the profit margin arrived under TNMM. Further in assessee‟s own case in the earlier years, the Tribunal has held that Internal CUP should be applied, therefore following the same precedence in this year also directions should be given for following the Inter…