Trib.) 6. Dy. CIT v. Panasonic AVC Networks India Co. Ltd.

63 SOT 121Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2014#11925 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2022.

Also reported as

42 Taxmann.com 420

Judgments citing Trib.) 6. Dy. CIT v. Panasonic AVC Networks India Co. Ltd.

TPR AUTOPARTS MFG INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 25(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 7100/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi21 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Section 143(3)

…d on moulds is revenue expenditure:- (i) CIT vs. Petro Araldite (P.) Ltd reported in [2018] 256 Taxman 16 (Bombay) (ii) ADCIT vs. Terex India (P.) Ltd reported in [2019] 71 ITR(T) 259 (Delhi - Trib.) (iii) DCIT vs. Panasonic AVC Networks India Co. Ltd. [2014] 63 SOT 121 (Delhi - Trib.)(URO) (iv) Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Skoda Auto India (P.) Ltd reported in [2019] 107 taxmann.com 423 (Pune - Trib.) (v) CIT vs. Tupperware India (Pvt.) Ltd. [2015] 53 Taxmann.com 232 (Delhi) (vi) CIT vs. Malerkotls Steels & Alloys (P) Ltd. [2011] 336 ITR 49 (P&H) (vii) CIT vs. Aditya Ferro Alloys (P) Ltd. [2014] 36…

M/S CONTINENTAL AUTOMOTIVE COMPONENTS INDIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 713/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 92C

…uthorities below while determining the ALP cost. The TPO should have made allowance for the higher overhead expenditure during the initial period of production." (ii) In the ruling of Dy. CIT v. Panasonic AVC Networks India Co. Ltd. 12014] 42 taxmann.com 420/ 63 SOT 121 (URO) (Delhi - Trib.) it was held that:— "5. ……….. Capacity underutilization by enterprises is certainly an important factor affecting net profit margin in the open market because lower capacity utilization results in higher per unit costs, which, in turn, results in lower profits. Of course, the fundamental issue, so far as acceptability of such…

ESSENTRA (INDIA) PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(4), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1610/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V Vasudevan, Vice Presidnet & Shri B.R Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri T Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)

Section 133(6)Section 143

…he authorities below while determining the ALP cost. The TPO should have made allowance for the higher overhead expenditure during the initial period of production." (ii) In the ruling of Dy. CIT v. Panasonic AVC Networks India Co. Ltd. f01414 taxmann.com 420/63 SOT 121 (URO) (Delhi - Trib.) it was held that:- "5......Capacity underutilization by enterprises is certainly an important factor affecting net profit margin in the open market because lower capacity utilization results in higher per unit costs, which, in turn, results in lower profits. Of course, the fundamental issue, so far as acceptability of IT(TP)…

TPR AUTOPARTS MFG INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 25(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4744/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Tpr Autoparts Mfg. India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Mayur Batra & Co., Ca, Circle-25(2), 7, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aacct9433D (Appellants) (Respondents) Assessee By : Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate Deptt. By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit, Dr & Ms Nidhi Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.12.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27Th December, 2016 Of The Cit(A)-44, New Delhi, Relating To The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Company Is A Wholly Owned Subsidiary Of M/S Teikoku Piston Ring Co. Ltd. (Japan). It Had Been Incorporated On 27.03.2008 With The Main Object To Carry On The Business To Manufacture, Export, Buy & Sell & Otherwise Deal In ‘Moulded’ Automobile Products I.E. Piston Rings, Cylinder Liners, Valve Seat Rings & Other Automotive Parts. It Is The Third Year Of Its Existence, Though Effectively It Is The Second Year Of Production After Its Set Up & Commencement Of Business In The Fy 2009-10. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 29.11.2011 Declaring A Loss Of Rs.6,45,23,822/-. Since The Assessee Had Entered Into Certain International Transactions With Its Aes, The Assessing Officer Referred The Matter To The Transfer Pricing Officer U/S 92Ca Of The Act For Determination Of The Arm’S Length Price Of Such International Transactions. The Tpo, During The Course Of Tp Assessment Proceedings, Observed That The Assessee Company Has Undertaken The Following International Transactions With Its Aes:- No. Nature Of Transaction Method Amount (In Rs.) Purchase Of Raw 1 5,85,47,963 Materials/Assets/Spares Tnmm Payment Of Royalty 76,32,183 2 Tnmm 3 Reimbursement Of Expenses To Ae 9,14,253 -

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate

Section 92C

…d on moulds is revenue expendiutre:- (i) CIT vs. Petro Araldite (P.) Ltd reported in [2018] 256 Taxman 16 (Bombay) (ii) ADCIT vs. Terex India (P.) Ltd reported in [2019] 71 ITR(T) 259 (Delhi - Trib.) (iii) DCIT vs. Panasonic AVC Networks India Co. Ltd. [2014] 63 SOT 121 (Delhi - Trib.)(URO) (iv) Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Skoda Auto India (P.) Ltd reported in [2019] 107 taxmann.com 423 (Pune - Trib.) (v) CIT vs. Tupperware India (Pvt.) Ltd. [2015] 53 Taxmann.com 232 (Delhi) 12 CIT vs. Malerkotls Steels & Alloys (P) Ltd. [2011] 336 ITR 49 (P&H) (vii) CIT vs. Aditya Ferro Alloys (P) Ltd. [2014] 36 ITR…

M/S. LUMMUS TECHNOLOGY HEAT TRANSFER BV,GURGAON vs. DCIT, GURGAON

ITA 1817/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subha Kant Sahu, Senior DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 92C(2)

…2008-09 and 2009-10 and also relied upon the decision rendered by the Tribunal in Transwitch India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2012) 53 SOT 151 (Delhi), SITEL India (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2013) 55 SOT 541 (Mumbai), DCIT vs. Panasonic AVC Network India Co. Ltd. (2014) 63 SOT 121 (Delhi), HCL Technologies BPO Services Ltd. vs. ACIT (2015) 69 SOT 571 (Delhi), Bechtel India (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2016) 66 taxmann.com 160 (Delhi), Ariston Thermo India Ltd. vs. DCIT (2014) 147 ITD 388 (Pune) and DCIT vs. Genesis Integrating Systems (India) (P) Ltd. (2016) 66 taxmann.com 20 (Bangalore). 9 10. However, on the other hand, ld. DR…

GIESECKE & DEVRIENT INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 5924/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…d 17.07.2013, upheld the adjustment claimed by the assessee on account of capacity utilization. Reliance in this regard is also placed on the recent decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Dy. CIT v. Panasonic AVC Networks India Co. Ltd. [2014] 63 SOT 121 (URO)/42 taxmann.com 420, wherein the Hon'ble Bench has held that capacity underutilization is an important factor affecting net profit margin as lower capacity utilization results in higher per unit costs which in turn results in lower profits. The relevant finding of the decision reads as under: "5. Having heard the rival contentions and having…

M/S I2 TECHNOLGOIES SOFTWARE PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)IV, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1208/BANG/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Mar 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boazit(Tp)A No.1208/Bang/2014 Assessment Year : 2005-06 M/S. Jda Software Private Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Limited Income Tax, (‘Erstwhile I2 Technologies India Range 11, Pvt. Ltd.,) Bengaluru. Tower A, Mantri Commercio, Near Sakra World Hospital, Outer Ring Road, Bellandur, Bengaluru-560103. Pan : Aaaci7334Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Arvind V. Sonde, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, Cit-Dr-I Date Of Hearing : 22.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2018

For Appellant: Shri. Arvind V. Sonde, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, CIT-DR-I

Section 10Section 133(6)Section 92C

…Services India (P) Ltd. case (supra) 4. Fiat India (P) Ltd., v. ACIT 2010-TII-30-ITAT-Mum-TP 5. Global Turbine services Inc. V. DDIT (International Taxation) [2013] 38 taxmann.com 220 (Delhi – Trib.) 6. Dy. CIT V. Panasonic AVC Networks India Co. Ltd. [2014] 63 SOT 121 (URO)/42 taxmann.com 420 (Delhi – Trib.) 7. Dy. CIT V. Petro Araldite (P) Ltd., [2013] 145 ITD 182/35 taxmann.com 590 (Mum. – Trib.) 8. Ariston Thermo India Ltd., V. Dy. CIT [2014] 147 ITD 388 [2013] 36 taxmann.com 501 (Pune – Trib.) 9. Honeywell Technology Solutions Lab (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CJT [2014] 61 SOT 61 (RO)/[2013] 35 taxmann.com 144 (Bang. –…

DCIT vs. M/S GOOGLE INDIA PVT. LTD.,,

In the result, revenue’s appeal and C

ITA 1298/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S Jayaramanrevenue’S Appeal

For Appellant: Shri. S. P. Singh, CA & Shri. Ujwal Tiwari, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Renuka Devi, JCIT

Section 10ASection 260A

…. ACIT 2010-TII-30-ITAT-Mum-TP IT(TP)A No.1298/Bang/2013 & CO No. 13/Bang/2016 Page 24 of 27 5. Global Turbine services Inc. V. DDIT (International Taxation) [2013] 38 taxmann.com 220 (Delhi – Trib.) 6. Dy. CIT V. Panasonic AVC Networks India Co. Ltd. [2014] 63 SOT 121 (URO)/42 taxmann.com 420 (Delhi – Trib.) 7. Dy. CIT V. Petro Araldite (P) Ltd., [2013] 145 ITD 182/35 taxmann.com 590 (Mum. – Trib.) 8. Ariston Thermo India Ltd., V. Dy. CIT [2014] 147 ITD 388 [2013] 36 taxmann.com 501 (Pune – Trib.) 9. Honeywell Technology Solutions Lab (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CJT [2014] 61 SOT 61 (RO)/[2013] 35 taxmann.com 144 (Bang. –…

M/S. SAMEDEUTZ-FAHR INDIA PVT. LTD.,RANIPET vs. ACIT, VELLORE

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

ITA 2666/CHNY/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Feb 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

Section 250(6)

…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 "ी "ड.एस. सु"दर "संह, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S.SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2666/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2006-07 Vs. M/s.SAME Deutz-Fahr India Pvt. Ltd., The Commissioner of Income No.72, SIPCOT Industrial Complex, Tax Appeals-13, Chennai. Sipcot, Ranipet – 632 403. [PAN: AAHCS 1924 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Mr.S.P.Chidambaram, Adv. : ""यथ" क…