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 366,470 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

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 560/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

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…

DCIT 1(3), Mumbai vs. Syngenta India Ltd, Pune

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1926/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

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…

Magneti Marelli Powertrain India Pvt. Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

ITA/350/2014HC Delhi25 Oct 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

Section 144C(13)Section 260

…ITA 350/2014 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 03.10.2016 Pronounced on: 25.10.2016 + ITA 350/2014 MAGNETI MARELLI POWERTRAIN INDIA PVT. LTD. …………Appellant Through: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Neeraj Jain and Sh. Aditya Vohra, Advocates. Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ……..Respondent Through: Sh. P. Roychaudhri, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Jr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. The assessee…

Haier Appliances India Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

ITA/713/2016HC Delhi25 Oct 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

…remanded the assessee’s appeal on determining ALP in its international transactions reported for AY 2006-2007 to 2008-2009. This court had in the judgment reported as Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India P. Ltd. vs.Commissioner of Income Tax (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del), pronounced upon the criteria which is to be adopted for treating advertising, marketing and sales promotion (AMP) expenses in any given year. The assessee was one such appellant before this court. The observations in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India P. Ltd.’s case (supra), in this regard is contained in the decision especia…

Haier Appliances India Ltd vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

ITA/711/2016HC Delhi25 Oct 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

…remanded the assessee’s appeal on determining ALP in its international transactions reported for AY 2006-2007 to 2008-2009. This court had in the judgment reported as Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India P. Ltd. vs.Commissioner of Income Tax (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del), pronounced upon the criteria which is to be adopted for treating advertising, marketing and sales promotion (AMP) expenses in any given year. The assessee was one such appellant before this court. The observations in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India P. Ltd.’s case (supra), in this regard is contained in the decision especia…

Haier Appliances India Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

ITA/712/2016HC Delhi25 Oct 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

…remanded the assessee’s appeal on determining ALP in its international transactions reported for AY 2006-2007 to 2008-2009. This court had in the judgment reported as Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India P. Ltd. vs.Commissioner of Income Tax (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del), pronounced upon the criteria which is to be adopted for treating advertising, marketing and sales promotion (AMP) expenses in any given year. The assessee was one such appellant before this court. The observations in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India P. Ltd.’s case (supra), in this regard is contained in the decision especia…

Hero Motocorp Limited, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1545/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Sawain, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―I-2‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. I. C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hero MotoCorp Limited, JCIT, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi PAN: AAACH0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT, M/s. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT, M/s. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Page 2 of 484 New Delhi Vs. Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. Hero Moto Corp. D…

M/S Labvantage Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 617/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Mawheet Dalal, Advocate & Shri Gunjan Khanna, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(15)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 144C(8)Section 148Section 40Section 92C

…t of his contentions :- (a) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs EKL Appliances Ltd reported in (2012) 24 taxmann.com 199 (Delhi) (b) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India (P) Ltd vs CIT reported in (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del) (c ) Delhi Tribunal in the case of AWB India (P) Ltd vs DCIT reported in (2014) 50 taxmann.com 323 (Delhi-Trib.) 6.3.1. The ld AR argued that the ld TPO took entity level margin which includes payment of royalty. Having done so, he again disallowed complete royalty thereby leading to double addition. In this regard, he placed reliance on t…

DCIT, Cir-2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Labvantage Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 599/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Mawheet Dalal, Advocate & Shri Gunjan Khanna, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(15)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 144C(8)Section 148Section 40Section 92C

…t of his contentions :- (a) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs EKL Appliances Ltd reported in (2012) 24 taxmann.com 199 (Delhi) (b) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India (P) Ltd vs CIT reported in (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del) (c ) Delhi Tribunal in the case of AWB India (P) Ltd vs DCIT reported in (2014) 50 taxmann.com 323 (Delhi-Trib.) 6.3.1. The ld AR argued that the ld TPO took entity level margin which includes payment of royalty. Having done so, he again disallowed complete royalty thereby leading to double addition. In this regard, he placed reliance on t…

M/S Labvantage Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1051/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Mawheet Dalal, Advocate & Shri Gunjan Khanna, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(15)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 144C(8)Section 148Section 40Section 92C

…t of his contentions :- (a) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs EKL Appliances Ltd reported in (2012) 24 taxmann.com 199 (Delhi) (b) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India (P) Ltd vs CIT reported in (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del) (c ) Delhi Tribunal in the case of AWB India (P) Ltd vs DCIT reported in (2014) 50 taxmann.com 323 (Delhi-Trib.) 6.3.1. The ld AR argued that the ld TPO took entity level margin which includes payment of royalty. Having done so, he again disallowed complete royalty thereby leading to double addition. In this regard, he placed reliance on t…

Skf India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 4(3)(2), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1420/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R C Sharma & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 144CSection 145ASection 234BSection 271(1)

…s regard. It was further submitted that, as per the OECD Guidelines, aggregation of the transactions can be done and further in support decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd., reported in [2015] 374 ITR 118 was relied upon. The assessee’s objections on various counts have been incorporated in the DRP’s order from pages 3 to 6. That apart, the assessee had also filed various additional evidences giving the details of intra-group services availed from the AE during the year. On such additional evidences and submissions, remand report was called for, i…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Haier Appliances (India) P. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1582/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri Kuldip Singh :Asstt. Yr. 2009-10 Haier Appliances India Ltd., Vs. Dcit Circle 12(1), B-1/A-14, Mohan Co-Op. New Delhi. Indl. Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi. Pan: Aabch 3162 L & Asstt. Yr. 2009-10 Dcit Circle 12(1), Vs. Haier Appliances India Ltd., New Delhi. B-1/A-14, Mohan Co-Op. Indl. Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi. (Appellant ) ( Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Manish Kumar CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…from 15% to 9% and, thus, reduced the difference to be adjusted at Rs. 114,601,751/-. 4. At the time of hearing both the parties agreed that in view of the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications Vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del), the matter needs to be restored back to the file of ld. AO/TPO for de novo consideration. 5. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have perused the record of the case. The assessee is a distributor of various products of its AE. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications (supra), has,…

Lg Life Sciences India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1818/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu S. Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR
Section 37(1)Section 92Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘I’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1818/Del/2015 (Assessment Year 2010-11) L G Life sciences India P. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, Circle 15(1), S-48, 2nd Floor, New Delhi Janta Market, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi-110 027 GIR / PAN :AAACL8019R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by :Shri Himanshu S. Sinha, Adv. Shri Yeeshu Arora, CA Ms. Vrinda Tulsian, Adv. Respondent by :Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR Date of hearing: 18.07.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 02.08.2016 ORDER PER BEENA A. PILLAI, JM: The presen…

Praxair India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 23/BANG/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.Chandrashekar. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.23/Bang/2012 (Assessment year: 2007-08) M/s.Praxair (I) Pvt. Ltd. Post Bag No.4251, No.8, Ulsoor Road, Bangalore-560042. … Appellant PA No.AAACP 9993 J Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, LTU, Bangalore … Respondent Appellant by : Shri K.R.Vasudevan, Advocate. Respondent by : Shri P.Chandrashekar. CIT(DR). Date of hearing : 06/06/2016 Date of pronouncement : 27/07/2016 O R D E R Per INTURI RAMA RAO, AM : This is an appeal filed by the assessee direct…

Seven N Consulting Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 6192/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jun 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amrendra Kumar, C.I.T, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234Section 271

…is placed on the following case : “ a) Tecnimont ICB (P) Ltd. V. ACIT, ITA No. 4608 & 5085/Mum/2010, ITAT Mumbai (Third Member) b) Birlasoft India Ltd. V. DCIT, 44 SOT 664, ITAT Delhi c) Sony Ericsson Mobile Coomunications India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT-III [(2015) 374 ITR 118] (Del HC) d) Diageo India Private Limited vs. DCIT Mumbai (ITA Nos. 7932/Mum/2011) e) Cable & Wireless (India) Ltd. Vs. ADIT Mumbai (ITA No. 822/Mum/2013) f) Genisys Integrating System (India) Private Limited vs. DCIT Bangalore (ITA No 908/Bang/2011) g) Birla Soft (India) Limited (formerly Birlasoft Limited) vs. DCIT, New Delhi (ITA No. 284/Del/2…

M/S. Luxottica India Eyewear Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 1115/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2009-10 Luxottica India Eyewear Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 7Th Floor, Tower 9B, Dlf Cyber Greens, Circle 4(1), Gurgaon. New Delhi. (Pan: Aabcl3871C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Vs. Luxottica India Eyewear Pvt. Ltd., 7Th Floor, Tower 9B, Dlf Cyber Circle-4(1), New Delhi. Greens, Gurgaon. (Pan: Aabcl3871C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Piyush Singh & Ms. Nena Singh, Adv. Department By: Shri Amrendra Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 08 .03.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 06 :06.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:In The Above Cross Appeals, The Assessee Has Raised The Issue Pertaining To Adjustment Made On Account Of Advertisement, Marketing & Sales Promotion Expense (Amp Expenses). The Revenue On The Other Hand Has Raised The Issue Of Adoption Of Tnmm As The Most Appropriate Method To Benchmark Transaction Pertaining To Import Of Goods, Prior Period Expenses

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Singh & Ms. Nena SinghFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 40

…the Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 20.5.2015 remanded the matter 3 back to the ITAT and directed the ITAT to decide the appeal on merits in accordance with the principles laid down in the case of Sony Erection Communication India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT – 374 ITR 118 (Del.). 5. Regarding the appeal preferred by the Revenue, the Learned AR pointed out that against the order dated 5.11.2014 of the ITAT, the Revenue had also preferred appeal before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court challenging the above issues and the Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 6.11.2015 in ITA No. 852/2015 has been pleased to dismiss t…

ACIT 5(1), Mumbai vs. Cadbury India Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5876/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2016AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: S/Shri N.K.Chand-CIT
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…आयकर आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “केकेकेके” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“K”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं सी. एन. "साद,"याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./5470/Mum/2012,िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2005-06 वष" Mondelez India Foods Private Addl. CIT, Range-5(1) Limited Mumbai. (formerly known as M/s. Cadbury India Limited), Mondelez House, Unit Vs. No.2001, 20th Floor, Tower…

Casio India Company Private Limited vs. DCIT Circle 3(1)

ITA/309/2016HC Delhi10 May 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…ment. 5. It is fairly stated that for the AY 2007-08 and 2008-09, the Assessee’s case was part of the batch of matters which was considered by this Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del.). It is contended that notwithstanding that in para 2 of the said judgment there is a tabular column which mentions the two appeals filed by the Assessee the facts of the said appeals were not discussed. It is also stated that finding in para 52 of the said judgment regarding existence of an international transaction involving the Ass…

L'Oreal India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

ITA 7714/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 May 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar and Ms. Jasmin AmalsadualaFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand-CIT
Section 254(1)Section 92

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “केकेकेके” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“K”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं सी. एन. "साद,"याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7714/Mum/2012,िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2008-09 वष" LÓreal India Private Limited DCIT-6(3) A-Wing, 8th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Marathon Futurex, N.M. Joshi Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400 001. Lower Parel,Mumbai…

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

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6794/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Alok Gupta, FCAFor Respondent: Shri A.M. Govil, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C

…ation of these two transactions of payment of Royalty and Fees for technical services from the other international transactions, is justified? 5 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 number of closely linked transactions.’ Dealing with AMP expenses,…