Textronix India P. Ltd. (supra), L’oreal India P. Ltd. (supra and Star Diamond Group v. DDIT

141 TTJ 21Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#16715 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2021.

Issues it is cited on

resale price methodcost plus methodfunctional analysisfar analysisrelated party transactionsection 92ca(1)tested partytransactional net margin methodcup methodintangible assetscomparable companiesmost appropriate method

Judgments citing Textronix India P. Ltd. (supra), L’oreal India P. Ltd. (supra and Star Diamond Group v. DDIT

Dentsply India Pvt Ltd vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 752/DEL/2009[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 752/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2002-03 Ita No. 1682/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2003-04 Ita No. 4195/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No. 263, Fies, Patparganj Circle-10(1), Industrial Area, Delhi-110092 New Delhi (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd3171E Assessee By : Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Meera Srivastava, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Meera Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 254

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I-2’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Amit Shukla, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 752/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2002-03 ITA No. 1682/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2003-04 ITA No. 4195/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, Plot No. 263, FIES, Patparganj Circle-10(1), Industrial Area, Delhi-110092 New Delhi (APPELLANTT (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACD3171E Assessee by : Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Meera Srivastava, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 25.03.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar,…

Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4195/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 752/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2002-03 Ita No. 1682/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2003-04 Ita No. 4195/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No. 263, Fies, Patparganj Circle-10(1), Industrial Area, Delhi-110092 New Delhi (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd3171E Assessee By : Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Meera Srivastava, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Meera Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 254

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I-2’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Amit Shukla, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 752/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2002-03 ITA No. 1682/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2003-04 ITA No. 4195/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, Plot No. 263, FIES, Patparganj Circle-10(1), Industrial Area, Delhi-110092 New Delhi (APPELLANTT (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACD3171E Assessee by : Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Meera Srivastava, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 25.03.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar,…

Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1682/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 752/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2002-03 Ita No. 1682/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2003-04 Ita No. 4195/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No. 263, Fies, Patparganj Circle-10(1), Industrial Area, Delhi-110092 New Delhi (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd3171E Assessee By : Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Meera Srivastava, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Meera Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 254

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I-2’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Amit Shukla, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 752/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2002-03 ITA No. 1682/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2003-04 ITA No. 4195/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, Plot No. 263, FIES, Patparganj Circle-10(1), Industrial Area, Delhi-110092 New Delhi (APPELLANTT (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACD3171E Assessee by : Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Meera Srivastava, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 25.03.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar,…

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

In the result, grounds no

ITA 6638/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Amit Shuklaita No.-6638/Del/2015 (Assessment Year-2011-12) Horiba India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Plot No. 246, Okhlaindl. Estate, Income Tax Phase-Iii, New Delhi. Circle 11(1), Aabch7371R New Delhi. Assessee By Shri Kapil Hirani & Darpan Kirpalani Revenue By Shri T.M. Shiva Kumar, Cit Dr

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234B

…t has been held that first examine whether there as any value addition on imported goods and if the answer is in the negative then apply RPM as a most appropriate method for trading transaction of imported goods. iii. Star Diamond Group (Mumbai ITAT) - (2011) 141 TTJ 21 (UO)/ITA No. 3923/Mum/2008- RPM is the most appropriate method for determining the ALP with respect to imports by a trader assessee. iv. Kodak Polychrome Graphics (I) (P) Ltd - (Mumbai ITAT) (2015) 171 TTJ 224 (Mum) - The assessee is, in fact, engaged in distribution activities. In such an activity RPM can be considered to be most appropriate meth…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Kobelco Construction Equipment India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6401/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri Amit Shuklaassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Shivakumar, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate
Section 143(3)

…rties without any value addition, the RPM would be the most appropriate method for determining the ALP. This view has been upheld by the Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, in Textronix India P. Ltd. (supra), L’oreal India P. Ltd. (supra) and Star Diamond Group v/s DDIT, 141 TTJ 21. The OECD guidelines and ICAI guidelines as have been referred to by the learned Counsel have also expressed on the similar line that RPM would be the best method when resale takes place without any value addition to a product for bench marking the ALP. 40. On the other hand, under the TNMM, the ALP is determined by comparing the operating profit…

Textronix India P. Ltd. (supra), L’oreal India P. Ltd. (supra and Star Diamond Group v. DDIT (141 TTJ 21) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax