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

Tekla India P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 15(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 211/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Divesh ChawlaFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 253Section 40

…ent fees, then there is no question of making any separate adjustment insofar as payment of management fees is concerned. In this regard, following observations of the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India Private Limited vs CIT 374 ITR 118, becomes relevant: “194. … ……. (v) Where the Assessing Officer/TPO accepts the comparables adopted by the assessed, with or without making adjustments, as a bundled transaction, it would be illogical and improper to treat AMP expenses as a separate international transaction, for the simple reason that if the functions performed by the tested par…

Cisco Systems Capital (India) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 321/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…IT(TP)A No.321/Bang/2022 Cisco Systems Capital (India) Private Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.321/Bang/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Cisco Systems Capital (India) Private Limited Brigade South Parade No.10, M.G. Road Vs. JCIT Circle-2(1)(1) Bangalore 560 001 Bangalore PAN NO : AACCC4552A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Rajan Vora, A.R. Respondent by : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 21.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 21.07.2022 O R D E R PER…

Casio India Company Private Ltd., Delhi vs. Dc/ACIT/Tp-1(2)(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1956/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 253Section 92B

…CIT vs. Sony Ericsson Mobile 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. 17. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del.) and subsequently in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT (2016) 328 ITR 210 (Del.) has 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 by making BLT as basis of th…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 vs. Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/199/2022HC Delhi18 Jul 2022

Bench: Lower Authorities, Also When The This Is A Digitally Signed Judgement. Neutral Citation No: 2022/Dhc/002652

Section 92C

…s decision in Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, (2016) 381 ITR 227 (Del), while considering the decision of this Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del), noted that: “The RP Method loses its accuracy and reliability where the reseller adds substantially to the value of the product or the goods are further processed or incorporated into a more sophisticated product or when the product/service is transformed.” 12. Therefore, a contrario, when the reseller does not add any value to the product…

Epson India Private Limited, Ulsoor vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 206/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 206/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Epson India Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy 12Th Floor, The Milenia, Commissioner Of Tower A, Income Tax, No. 1,Murphy Road, Circle 2 (1)(1), Ulsoor, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 008. Pan: Aaace7858F Appellant Respondent : Shri Padamchand Khincha, Assessee By Ca : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Revenue By Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 15-06-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 14-07-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 25/03/2021 Passed By National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi For A.Y. 2016-17 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “General Ground 1. The Orders Passed By Learned Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax / Income- Tax Officer, National E-Assessment Centre (Hereinafter Referred As "Ao" For Brevity), Learned Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tp) — 1(2)(1), Bangalore (Hereinafter Referred As "Tpo" For Brevity) & The Honourable Drp-1

For Respondent: Shri Padamchand Khincha

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 206/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/s. Epson India Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy 12th Floor, The Milenia, Commissioner of Tower A, Income Tax, No. 1,Murphy Road, Circle 2 (1)(1), Ulsoor, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 008. PAN: AAACE7858F APPELLANT RESPONDENT : Shri Padamchand Khincha, Assessee by CA : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Revenue by CIT DR Date of Hearing : 15-06-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14-07-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appe…

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Khs Machinery Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2169/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jul 2022AY 2013-14
Section 11BSection 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Mr. Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member : Asstt.Year 2006-09 : Asstt.Year 2008-09 ITA No.1148 /Ahd/2015 : Asstt.Year 2009-10 : Asstt.Year 2011-12 KHS Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Asst.CIT (OSD)-1, 53, Madbhuban, Range-4 Ahmedabad Nr. Madalpur Underbridge, Vs. Ahmedabad-380006 PAN No: AABCK 2513Q (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.2168 /Ahd/2017 : Asstt.Year 2012-13 ITA No.2169 /Ahd/2017 : Asstt.Year 2013-14 Asst.CIT (OSD)-1, Range-4 KHS Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Ahmedabad 53, Madbhuban, Vs. Nr. Madalpur Underbridge,…

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Khs Machinery Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2168/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jul 2022AY 2012-13
Section 11BSection 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Mr. Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member : Asstt.Year 2006-09 : Asstt.Year 2008-09 ITA No.1148 /Ahd/2015 : Asstt.Year 2009-10 : Asstt.Year 2011-12 KHS Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Asst.CIT (OSD)-1, 53, Madbhuban, Range-4 Ahmedabad Nr. Madalpur Underbridge, Vs. Ahmedabad-380006 PAN No: AABCK 2513Q (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.2168 /Ahd/2017 : Asstt.Year 2012-13 ITA No.2169 /Ahd/2017 : Asstt.Year 2013-14 Asst.CIT (OSD)-1, Range-4 KHS Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Ahmedabad 53, Madbhuban, Vs. Nr. Madalpur Underbridge,…

Khs Machinery Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 181/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jul 2022AY 2011-12
Section 11BSection 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Mr. Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member : Asstt.Year 2006-09 : Asstt.Year 2008-09 ITA No.1148 /Ahd/2015 : Asstt.Year 2009-10 : Asstt.Year 2011-12 KHS Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Asst.CIT (OSD)-1, 53, Madbhuban, Range-4 Ahmedabad Nr. Madalpur Underbridge, Vs. Ahmedabad-380006 PAN No: AABCK 2513Q (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.2168 /Ahd/2017 : Asstt.Year 2012-13 ITA No.2169 /Ahd/2017 : Asstt.Year 2013-14 Asst.CIT (OSD)-1, Range-4 KHS Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Ahmedabad 53, Madbhuban, Vs. Nr. Madalpur Underbridge,…

Khs Machinery Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, (OSD)-1, Circle-4, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1148/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jul 2022AY 2009-10
Section 11BSection 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Mr. Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member : Asstt.Year 2006-09 : Asstt.Year 2008-09 ITA No.1148 /Ahd/2015 : Asstt.Year 2009-10 : Asstt.Year 2011-12 KHS Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Asst.CIT (OSD)-1, 53, Madbhuban, Range-4 Ahmedabad Nr. Madalpur Underbridge, Vs. Ahmedabad-380006 PAN No: AABCK 2513Q (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.2168 /Ahd/2017 : Asstt.Year 2012-13 ITA No.2169 /Ahd/2017 : Asstt.Year 2013-14 Asst.CIT (OSD)-1, Range-4 KHS Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Ahmedabad 53, Madbhuban, Vs. Nr. Madalpur Underbridge,…

Khs Machinery Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT. (OSD)-I, Range-4, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1314/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jul 2022AY 2008-09
Section 11BSection 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Mr. Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member : Asstt.Year 2006-09 : Asstt.Year 2008-09 ITA No.1148 /Ahd/2015 : Asstt.Year 2009-10 : Asstt.Year 2011-12 KHS Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Asst.CIT (OSD)-1, 53, Madbhuban, Range-4 Ahmedabad Nr. Madalpur Underbridge, Vs. Ahmedabad-380006 PAN No: AABCK 2513Q (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.2168 /Ahd/2017 : Asstt.Year 2012-13 ITA No.2169 /Ahd/2017 : Asstt.Year 2013-14 Asst.CIT (OSD)-1, Range-4 KHS Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Ahmedabad 53, Madbhuban, Vs. Nr. Madalpur Underbridge,…

Khs Machinery Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT. Range-4, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2948/AHD/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jul 2022AY 2006-07
Section 11BSection 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Mr. Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member : Asstt.Year 2006-09 : Asstt.Year 2008-09 ITA No.1148 /Ahd/2015 : Asstt.Year 2009-10 : Asstt.Year 2011-12 KHS Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Asst.CIT (OSD)-1, 53, Madbhuban, Range-4 Ahmedabad Nr. Madalpur Underbridge, Vs. Ahmedabad-380006 PAN No: AABCK 2513Q (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.2168 /Ahd/2017 : Asstt.Year 2012-13 ITA No.2169 /Ahd/2017 : Asstt.Year 2013-14 Asst.CIT (OSD)-1, Range-4 KHS Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Ahmedabad 53, Madbhuban, Vs. Nr. Madalpur Underbridge,…

The Dy. CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Gujarat Microwax Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, both of the Appeals of Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2683/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 92E

…ough each sale and each provision of service is priced separately, they were all provided under one composite agreement which constitutes one international transaction". Similarly, in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India Pvt Ltd Vs CIT [(2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del)], Hon'ble Delhi High Court has observed that, "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 a closely linked or continuous transactions". Their Lordships have, in this bac…

The Dy. CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Gujarat Microwax Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, both of the Appeals of Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2682/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 92E

…ough each sale and each provision of service is priced separately, they were all provided under one composite agreement which constitutes one international transaction". Similarly, in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India Pvt Ltd Vs CIT [(2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del)], Hon'ble Delhi High Court has observed that, "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 a closely linked or continuous transactions". Their Lordships have, in this bac…

M/S. Himalaya Wellness Company (Formerly Known As the Himalaya Drug Company), Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(1)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 259/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.259/Bang/2022 : Asst.Year 2017-2018 M/S.Himalaya Wellness Company The Deputy Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As The Himalaya Income-Tax, Circle 6(1)(1) V. Bengaluru. Drug Company), Makali, Tumkur Road Bengaluru – 562 162. Pan : Aadft3025B. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri.Padamchand Kincha, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sumer Singh Meena, CIT -DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 2(11)Section 92C

…ferences in the transactions and further making reasonable adjustments to the comparable transaction is impossible. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 55 taxmann.com 240/231 Taxman 113/374 ITR 118 held that the TNMM is a preferred TP Method, for determination of ALP of international transactions for its proficiency, convenience and reliability and in TNMM preference should be given to internal or in-house comparables; as held in paras 89 and 90 thereof :— "89. The TNM Method has seen a transition from a disfavoured comparable method, to po…

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

ITA 35/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. George George K & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 92C

…hus, assessee has to use the brand name primarily with the intention of providing identity to the products sold by the assessee. He relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony Erricson Mobile Communications (P) Ltd.(supra), Vs. CIT [374 ITR 118 (Del.)] where the court has held as under while dealing with identical issue:- 101. However, once the Assessing Officer/TPO accepts and adopts TNM Method, but then chooses to treat a particular expenditure like AMP as a separate international transaction without bifurcation/segregation, it would as noticed above, lead to unusual and incongruous r…

Msd Pharmaceuticals Private Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Special Range- 6, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed and the adjustment of Rs

ITA 9714/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmam/S. Msd Pharmaceuticals Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax, 1544, Level-15, Eros Corporate Adl/Jcit, Tower, Nehru Place, Special Range-6 New Delhi-110019 New Delhi Pan : Aaecm1106C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 2CSection 92C

…djustment on account of the arm's length price of AMP expenses could not be made. 3.10 The Ld. AO/ TPO/ Hon'ble DRP erred in applying BLT against the binding precedent as laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Sony Ericson Mobile Communications [374 ITR 118 (Del)] and Appellant's own case in previous assessment years. 3.11 The Ld. AO/ TPO/ Hon'ble DRP erred in not appreciating that 'bright line limit' is not a prescribed method under the purview of section 92C of the Act. 3.12 The Ld. AO/ TPO/ Hon'ble DRP erred not appreciating that Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) analysis included AMP expens…

Essilor India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 219/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 219/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Essilor India Pvt. Ltd., 10Th Floor, Prestige Trade The Deputy Tower, Commissioner Of 46, Palace Road, High Income Tax, Grounds Sampangi Rama Circle-2 (1)(1), Nagar, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 001. Pan: Aaace4623J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Chavali Narayan, Ca : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Revenue By Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 30-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-05-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 30.03.2021 For Assessment Year 2016-17 Passed By The Ld.Acit, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Essilor India Private Limited (Hereinafter Referred To As "Eipl" Or The "Company" Or The "Appellant"), Respectfully Craves Leave To Prefer An Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax / Income Tax Officer

For Appellant: Shri Chavali Narayan, CA
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…under consideration. It is submitted that the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 381 ITR 117, and in the case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 374 ITR 118 which were ignored by the authorities below. 5. The Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal by order dated 06.02.2020 for A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15 observed and held as under: “16. We have given our careful consideration to the rival submissions. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (MSIL) v. Addl. CIT, TPO [2010] 328 ITR…

Casio India Company Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 5(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 857/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 857/Del/2021 (A.Y 2016-17)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 253Section 92B

…T vs. 9 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. 17. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del.) and subsequently in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT (2016) 328 ITR 210 (Del.) has 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 by making BLT as basis of th…

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

ITA 6748/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit Gruner India Pvt. Ltd. Circle – 10 (2) Vs 15, Dsidc, Okhla Industrial New Delhi Area, Phase-Ii, Scheme-1, New Delhi Pan No.Aadcg2938H (Appellan (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 234BSection 254Section 274Section 92C

…led to follow the directions issued by Hon'ble Delhi High Court requiring to follow the directions issued by it in Magneti Marelli Pwertrain India Pvt. Ltd vs. DC1T [(2016) 389 ITR 469(Del)] and Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India (P) Ltd. vs. C1T[(2015) 374 ITR 118(Del)]. 8. Ld. TPO failed to apply CUP as directed by Hon’ble ITAT. 9. Ld. TPO has erred in disallowing the Royalty and FTS on the ground that royalty is not required to be paid to the AE as it is not bringing any income to the assessee. 10. Ld.TPO has erred in law and on facts of the case by rejecting the aggregation approach under TNMM for benc…

Lambda Therapeutic Research Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. DCIT Circle-2(1) (2), Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 91/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.91/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Lambda Therapeutic Research Ltd. D.C.I.T., Lambda House, Vs. Circle-2(1)(2), Opp. Gujarat High Court, Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway, Gota, Ahmedabad-382481. Pan: Aaacl4089R

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parimalsingh B ParmarFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 2Section 234ASection 271Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD (CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT AT AHMEDABAD) BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.91/AHD/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Lambda Therapeutic Research Ltd. D.C.I.T., Lambda House, Vs. Circle-2(1)(2), Opp. Gujarat High Court, Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway, Gota, Ahmedabad-382481. PAN: AAACL4089R And आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 409/AHD/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 A.C.I.T., Lambda Therapeutic Research Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Vs. Lambda Hous…