VVF Ltd. v. DCIT I (supra) and DCIT Vs. Tech Mahindra Ltd.

46 SOT 141Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#2132 most cited

What is VVF Ltd. v. DCIT I (supra) and DCIT Vs. Tech Mahindra Ltd. authority for?

The Arm's Length Price for loans advanced to Associate Enterprises must be determined by the rate of interest prevalent in the country where the loan is received or consumed, taking into account the currency of the loan.

54

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

VVF Ltd. v. DCIT · DCIT v. Tech Mahindra Ltd. · Section 92B · Section 144C · Arm's Length Price · ALP loans to Associate Enterprises · interest rate benchmarking · country of loan consumption · inter-company loans · transfer pricing adjustment

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 144C(5)Section 144C(13)Section 144BSection 153Section 234BSection 234C

Issues it is cited on

section 92b(1)safe harbour rulessection 72asection 92(1)section 32(2)section 92f(v)preliminary expensessafe harboursection 100corporate guaranteesection 92bcup method

Judgments citing VVF Ltd. v. DCIT I (supra) and DCIT Vs. Tech Mahindra Ltd.

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Omaxe Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 78/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & (Through Video Conferencing)

Section 143Section 250Section 253(2)Section 80I

…ssue I rely on various judicial pronouncements reported as under: " Siva Industries and Holdings Ltd. vs ACIT [ITA No. 2148/Mds/2148] " Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd vs ACIT [ITA No. 7354/Mum/2011] " Four Soft Ltd. vs DICT 142 TTJ 338 " DCIT vs Tech Mahindra Ltd [46 SOT 141 Mum] " Tricorn India Ltd. vs ITO [ITA No. 332/Mu m/2014] " Aurino Solutions Ltd [ita no. 7872/Mum/2011] " Hinduja Global Solutions Ltd vs ACIT [ITA No. 254/Mum/2013] " Cotton Natural India Private Limited [TS -304-lTAT-201(DEL)-TP] The decision in the case of cotton natural India private Limited has been affirmed by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi rep…

Ivy Comptech Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 2195/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuay : 2013-14 Ivy Comptech Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Circle – 2(1) Hyderabad. Pan – Aaaci 8884K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Prashant Meharchandani Revenue By: Shri R. Dipak Date Of Hearing: 27/04/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 20/07/2021

For Appellant: Shri PrashantFor Respondent: Shri R. Dipak
Section 143(3)

…d below: "7. We find that the impugned order of the Tribunal inter alia has followed the decisions of the Bombay Bench of the Tribunal in cases of VVF Ltd. v. Dy. CIT /IT Appeal No. 673 (Mum.) of 2006/ and Dy. CIT v. Tech Mahindra Ltd./20ll/12 taxmann.com 132/46 SOT 141 (Mum.) (URO) to reach the conclusion that ALP in the case of loans advanced to Associate Enterprises would be determined on the basis of rate of interest being charged in the country where the loan is received/consumed. Mr. Suresh Kumar the learned counsel for the revenue informed us that the Revenue has not preferred any appeal against the decisi…

M/S. Dabur India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6525/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…ircumstances of the present case:- (i) Siva Industries and Holdings Ltd. vs. ACIT [ITA No. 2148/Mds/2148]; (ii) Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd. vs. ACIT [ITA No. 7354/Mum/2011], (iii) Four Soft Ltd. vs. DC1T: 142 TTJ 358 (Hyd.); (iv) DCIT vs. Tech Mahindra Ltd. : 46 SOT 141 (Mum); (v) Tricom India Ltd. vs. 1TO [ITA No. 322/Mum/2014]; (vi) Parle Biscuits (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITA No. 9010/Mum/2010); (vii) PMP Auto Components (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT : 66 SOT 42; (viii) Hinduja Global Solutions Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 254/Mum/2013); (ix) Bhansali & Co. vs. ACIT (ITA No. 825/Mu/2014) 82.11 The ld. Counsel for the assesseedrew t…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dabur India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6256/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…ircumstances of the present case:- (i) Siva Industries and Holdings Ltd. vs. ACIT [ITA No. 2148/Mds/2148]; (ii) Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd. vs. ACIT [ITA No. 7354/Mum/2011], (iii) Four Soft Ltd. vs. DC1T: 142 TTJ 358 (Hyd.); (iv) DCIT vs. Tech Mahindra Ltd. : 46 SOT 141 (Mum); (v) Tricom India Ltd. vs. 1TO [ITA No. 322/Mum/2014]; (vi) Parle Biscuits (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITA No. 9010/Mum/2010); (vii) PMP Auto Components (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT : 66 SOT 42; (viii) Hinduja Global Solutions Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 254/Mum/2013); (ix) Bhansali & Co. vs. ACIT (ITA No. 825/Mu/2014) 82.11 The ld. Counsel for the assesseedrew t…

M/S. Dabur India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3241/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…ircumstances of the present case:- (i) Siva Industries and Holdings Ltd. vs. ACIT [ITA No. 2148/Mds/2148]; (ii) Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd. vs. ACIT [ITA No. 7354/Mum/2011], (iii) Four Soft Ltd. vs. DC1T: 142 TTJ 358 (Hyd.); (iv) DCIT vs. Tech Mahindra Ltd. : 46 SOT 141 (Mum); (v) Tricom India Ltd. vs. 1TO [ITA No. 322/Mum/2014]; (vi) Parle Biscuits (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITA No. 9010/Mum/2010); (vii) PMP Auto Components (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT : 66 SOT 42; (viii) Hinduja Global Solutions Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 254/Mum/2013); (ix) Bhansali & Co. vs. ACIT (ITA No. 825/Mu/2014) 82.11 The ld. Counsel for the assesseedrew t…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dabur India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3114/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…ircumstances of the present case:- (i) Siva Industries and Holdings Ltd. vs. ACIT [ITA No. 2148/Mds/2148]; (ii) Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd. vs. ACIT [ITA No. 7354/Mum/2011], (iii) Four Soft Ltd. vs. DC1T: 142 TTJ 358 (Hyd.); (iv) DCIT vs. Tech Mahindra Ltd. : 46 SOT 141 (Mum); (v) Tricom India Ltd. vs. 1TO [ITA No. 322/Mum/2014]; (vi) Parle Biscuits (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITA No. 9010/Mum/2010); (vii) PMP Auto Components (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT : 66 SOT 42; (viii) Hinduja Global Solutions Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 254/Mum/2013); (ix) Bhansali & Co. vs. ACIT (ITA No. 825/Mu/2014) 82.11 The ld. Counsel for the assesseedrew t…

Bombay Rayon Holdings Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO-9(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5986/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri. Madhur Agrawal, Shri Ajit KumarFor Respondent: Shri. Anand Mohan
Section 131Section 133Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 148Section 92(1)Section 92C(1)

…nterest at 10.25% being the lending rate charged by the banks in India (Arms length price). The DRP enhanced the rate of interest to 12%. On appeal, the Tribunal followed its earlier view in WF Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITA No.673/Mum/06) and DCIT Vs. Tech Mahindra Ltd (46 SOT 141) and held that as the amount was advanced to an AE in Germany, the ALP rate of the interest had to be determined by adopting the EURIBOR rate of interest i.e. rates prevailing in Europe. The Department challenged the said finding of the Tribunal in the High Court on the basis that the EURIBOR does not govern the monetary markets or interest rates…

DCIT Cen Cir 8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2452/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: S/Shri Rishabh Shah & Rakesh Joshi- Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri Akhtar H.Ansari- Ld.DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 92C

…nder: - 7. We find that the impugned order of the Tribunal inter alia has followed the decisions of the Bombay Bench of the Tribunal in cases of VVF Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal No. 673 (Mum.) of 2006] and Dy. CIT v. Tech Mahindra Ltd. [2011] 12 taxmann.com 132/46 SOT 141 (Mum.) (URO) to reach the conclusion that ALP in the case of loans advanced to Associate Enterprises would be determined on the basis of rate of interest being charged in the country where the loan is received/consumed. Mr. Suresh Kumar the learned counsel for the revenue informed us that the Revenue has not preferred any appeal against the decisi…

DCIT Cen Cir 8(1), Mumbai vs. Allcargo Logistics Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4786/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhdcit. Cc -8(1), M/S Allcargo Logistics Ltd. Room No. 656, 6Th Floor, 5Th Floor, Diamond Square, Cst Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Ropad, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400098 Pan: Aacca2894D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B.V. Jhaveri with Shri I.M. Contractor
Section 253Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT. CC -8(1), M/s Allcargo Logistics Ltd. Room No. 656, 6th Floor, 5th Floor, Diamond Square, CST Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Ropad, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400098 PAN: AACCA2894D (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.108/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year- 2010-11) M/s Allcargo Logistics Ltd. DCIT. CC -8(1), 5th Floor, Diamond Square, CST Room No. 656, 6th Floor, Ropad, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400098 Mumbai-400020 PAN: AACCA2894…

Godrej Consumer Products Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 14(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be partly allowed

ITA 1899/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Farrokh V. Irani/ F.HFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumar (DR)
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 37Section 801CSection 92B

…e determined on EURIBOR rate of interest i.e. rates prevailing in Europe. Thus partly allowed the respondent – assessee's appeal by applying the decision of the Tribunal in the case of “VVF Ltd. Vs. DCIT, (ITA No.673/Mum/06)” and “DCIT Vs. Tech Mahindra Ltd. (46 SOT 141)” by holding that the loan advanced to an Associate Enterprise situated abroad, the rate of interest to be applied is the rate prevailing in the country where the loan has been consumed.” 6. Mr.Pardiwala, learned Senior Advocate for the respondent-assessee pointed out that although they have raised an issue of transaction not being international…

Geodesic Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT -8(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1234/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1234/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Geodesic Limited, Dcit – 8(1), बनाम/ B-3, Lunic Industries, Mumbai. V. Midc, Cross Road B, Opp Sbi, Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400 093. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacb6163A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mrs. Malathi Sridharan, DR
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…der:- “7. We find that the impugned order of the Tribunal inter alia has followed the decisions of the Bombay Bench of the Tribunal in cases of VVF Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal No. 673 (Mum.) of 2006] and Dy. CIT v. Tech Mahindra Ltd. [2011] 12 taxmann.com 132/46 SOT 141 (Mum.) (URO) to reach the conclusion that ALP in the case of loans advanced to Associate Enterprises would be determined on the basis of rate of interest being charged in the country where the loan is received/consumed. Mr. Suresh Kumar the learned counsel for the revenue informed us that the Revenue has not preferred any appeal against the decisi…

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

…d. in ITA No. 233 of 2014 " Bharti Airtel Ltd. Vs ACIT in " Siva Industries and Holdings Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 2148/Mds/…. " Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 7354/Mum/2011 " Four Soft Ltd. Vs DCIT 142 TTJ 358 (Hyd.) " DCIT Vs Tech Mahindra Ltd. 46 SOT 141 (Mum) " Tricom India Ltd. Vs ITO in " Aurionpro Solutions Ltd. in ITA No. 7872/Mum./2011 " Hinduja Global Solutions Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 254/Mum/2013 " Advanta India Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 1643/Ban/12 21. In his rival submissions the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and further submitted that the transactions of th…

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

…d. in ITA No. 233 of 2014 " Bharti Airtel Ltd. Vs ACIT in " Siva Industries and Holdings Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 2148/Mds/…. " Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 7354/Mum/2011 " Four Soft Ltd. Vs DCIT 142 TTJ 358 (Hyd.) " DCIT Vs Tech Mahindra Ltd. 46 SOT 141 (Mum) " Tricom India Ltd. Vs ITO in " Aurionpro Solutions Ltd. in ITA No. 7872/Mum./2011 " Hinduja Global Solutions Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 254/Mum/2013 " Advanta India Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No. 1643/Ban/12 21. In his rival submissions the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and further submitted that the transactions of th…

Marico Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl.C.I.T. RG. 9(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8858/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2016AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala and Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand-CIT
Section 254(1)

…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 अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./8858/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/s. Marico Ltd. ACIT-6(3), Range-9(2) Rang Sharda, K.C. Marg, Bandra (W) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Mumbai-400 050. Mumbai-400 020. PAN: AAACM 7493 G (अपीलाथ"…