Whirlpool of India Ltd. v. DCIT

381 ITR 154High Court2016#883 most cited

What is Whirlpool of India Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

Advertisement, Marketing, and Promotion (AMP) expenditure incurred by an Indian entity directly benefits its own business and cannot be automatically treated as an international transaction for global brand building by associated enterprises without specific statutory provisions or proper analysis.

119

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

Whirlpool of India Ltd. · section 92B · section 92C · section 92F(v) · AMP expenditure · bright line test · international transaction · brand building · transfer pricing adjustment · functional analysis

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 144BSection 234BSection 92CSection 92CA(3)Section 92FSection 10B
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

bright line testsection 92f(v)amp expendituresection 92ffunctional analysissection 92(1)comparable uncontrolled price methodsection 92c(3)cost plus methodprofit split methodsection 92bsection 92b(1)

Judgments citing Whirlpool of India Ltd. v. DCIT

Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the additional ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 463/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench “I-2”, New Delhi

For Appellant: Mr. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Meera Shrivastava, CIT (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80ISection 92C

…was a direction by the foreign AE to incur advertising expenses in India. He referred to the following judgements of the Delhi High Court in support of the above contentions- • Maruti Suzuki India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (381 ITR 117); • CIT v. Whirlpool India Ltd. (381 ITR 154); • Bausch & Lomb Eyecare India Pvt. Ltc. V. ACIT (381 ITR 227); • Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (237 Taxmann 304). 36. That apart, he also submitted that there arose patent errors in the order of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). He drew our attention to the directions issued by the DRP dated 27.1.2021 in this regard. He also drew…

M/S Glaxosmithkline Asia Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Chandigarh

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

ITA 532/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jul 2021AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.AdvFor Respondent: Smt. C. Chandrakanta, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

…e question of reasonableness or measure of expenses to be allowed cannot be a subject matter of adjustment or disallowance under Section 37(1) of the Act." It was held similarly by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Whirlpool of India Limited 381 ITR 154 (Pg. 278 of PB-CL-2 for AY 2006-07). Recently Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CJT-3 vs. Seagram Manufacturing (P) Ltd. 245 Taxman 389 reiterating the law in this regard, held (Pg. 288 of PB-CL-2 for AY2006-07]: “6. Regarding Question No. 2, during the course of proceedings in the relevant Assessment Year 2003-04, the AO disallowed 10%…

Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 2(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee are allowed

ITA 8700/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit E-9, Connaught Hose, Circle – 2(2), Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi - 110001 Pan No. Aaaca 0364 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Taran Deep Singh, Adv. Revenue By Shri Surender Pal, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18/05/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.09.2019 Of The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Act Pursuant To The Direction Of Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) – 1, Delhi For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under :

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

…vour of the assessee by the coordinate Bench by taking into consideration the following decisions of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court:- (i) Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 381 ITR 117 (Delhi); (ii) CIT vs. Whirlpool of India Ltd. reported in 381 ITR 154 (Delhi); (iii) Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT reported in 237 Taxman 304 (Delhi); (iv) Bausch and Lomb Eyecare (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Addl. reported in CIT 381 ITR 227 (Delhi); 5.1 In the year under consideration there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case as compared to A.Y. 2009-10 and even the agreements between ass…

Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 2(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 7376/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92F

…our of the assessee by the coordinate Bench by taking into consideration the following decisions of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court:- (i) Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 381 ITR 117 (Delhi); (ii) CIT vs. Whirlpool of India Ltd. reported in 381 ITR 154 (Delhi); (iii) Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT reported in 237 Taxman 304 (Delhi); (iv) Bausch and Lomb Eyecare (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Addl. reported in CIT 381 ITR 227 (Delhi); 5.1 In the year under consideration there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case as compared to A.Y. 2009-10 and even the agreements between as…

Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 10(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1431/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.1431 /Mum/2014 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Income- Colgate Research Centre, Main Vs. Tax-10(3) Street, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai – 400076

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Senior Advocate a/w ShriFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80ISection 8o

…question of law. Thus, not entertained. 5.5 Similar view has been taken by Hon‘ble Delhi High Court in catena of subsequent decisions, few of which are as follows:- (i) Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT 2015 64 Taxmnn.com 150 (ii) CIT v. Whirlpool of India Ltd. 381 ITR 154 (iii) Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Addl.CIT 381 ITR 237 (iv) Yum Restaurants (India) (P.) Ltd. v. ITO 380 ITR 637 In the above-mentioned decisions, it has categorically been held that in the absence of agreement between the assessee and its AE obliging the assessee to incur AMP expenditure on behalf of its AE, no international trans…

DCIT 10(3), Mumbai vs. Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1350/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.1431 /Mum/2014 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Income- Colgate Research Centre, Main Vs. Tax-10(3) Street, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai – 400076

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Senior Advocate a/w ShriFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80ISection 8o

…question of law. Thus, not entertained. 5.5 Similar view has been taken by Hon‘ble Delhi High Court in catena of subsequent decisions, few of which are as follows:- (i) Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT 2015 64 Taxmnn.com 150 (ii) CIT v. Whirlpool of India Ltd. 381 ITR 154 (iii) Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Addl.CIT 381 ITR 237 (iv) Yum Restaurants (India) (P.) Ltd. v. ITO 380 ITR 637 In the above-mentioned decisions, it has categorically been held that in the absence of agreement between the assessee and its AE obliging the assessee to incur AMP expenditure on behalf of its AE, no international trans…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Xerox India Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1053/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: 1. That on facts and in law the
Section 92BSection 92F

…By now, it is settled principle of law that BLT is not a valid method for determining the existence of international transaction or for determination of ALP of such transactions. 22. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Whirlpool of India Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 154 (Delhi) decided the identical issue by returning following findings: “34. The TP adjustment is not expected to be made by deducing from the difference between the 'excessive' AMP expenditure incurred by the Assessee and the AMP expenditure of a comparable entity that an international transaction exists and then proceed to make the adjustment of…

Xerox India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2060/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 234BSection 92BSection 92F

…By now, it is settled principle of law that BLT is not a valid method for determining the existence of international transaction or for determination of ALP of such transactions. 22. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Whirlpool of India Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 154 (Delhi) decided the identical issue by returning following findings :- “34. The TP adjustment is not expected to be made by deducing from the difference between the 'excessive' AMP expenditure incurred by the Assessee and the AMP expenditure of a comparable entity that an international transaction exists and then proceed to make the adjustment o…

Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 10(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 6766/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Ms. Soumya Kulkarni/Mr. Arvind V. Sonde, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Michael Jerald, DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…(ii) the case of the assessee is in accordance with the ratio laid down by the Bombay High Court in Johnson & Johnson Ltd. (80 taxmann.com 269) and Delhi High Court in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 64 taxmann.com 150 ; CIT v. Whirlpool of India Ltd. 381 ITR 154; Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT 381 ITR 237, (iii) in AY 2011-12, the DRP has decided the issue in favour of the assessee following the decision in the case of Maruti Suzuki (supra). On the other hand, the Ld. DR relies on the order passed by the AO as per the direction of the DRP. 17. We have heard the rival submissions a…

DCIT, CC-31, New Delhi vs. Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 2601/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2020AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: H.K. Choudhary, CIT, DR
Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : I-2 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1365, 1379/Del/2018 & 2366/Del/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, Sudeep Rastogi, Vice President- Central Circle-31, Taxation, New Delhi. Pernod Richard India Pvt. Ltd., 15th Floor, Building No.8C, DLF Cyber City, DLF Phase-2, Gurgaon. PAN: AAACS4781P ITA Nos.1607, 1608/Del/2018 & 2601/Del/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 DCIT, Vs. Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-31, Sudee…

Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2366/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2020AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: H.K. Choudhary, CIT, DR
Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : I-2 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1365, 1379/Del/2018 & 2366/Del/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, Sudeep Rastogi, Vice President- Central Circle-31, Taxation, New Delhi. Pernod Richard India Pvt. Ltd., 15th Floor, Building No.8C, DLF Cyber City, DLF Phase-2, Gurgaon. PAN: AAACS4781P ITA Nos.1607, 1608/Del/2018 & 2601/Del/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 DCIT, Vs. Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-31, Sudee…

ACIT, CC- 31, New Delhi vs. Pernod Richard India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 1607/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2020AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: H.K. Choudhary, CIT, DR
Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : I-2 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1365, 1379/Del/2018 & 2366/Del/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, Sudeep Rastogi, Vice President- Central Circle-31, Taxation, New Delhi. Pernod Richard India Pvt. Ltd., 15th Floor, Building No.8C, DLF Cyber City, DLF Phase-2, Gurgaon. PAN: AAACS4781P ITA Nos.1607, 1608/Del/2018 & 2601/Del/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 DCIT, Vs. Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-31, Sudee…

Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 31, New Delhi

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

ITA 1365/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2020AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: H.K. Choudhary, CIT, DR
Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : I-2 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.1365, 1379/Del/2018 & 2366/Del/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, Sudeep Rastogi, Vice President- Central Circle-31, Taxation, New Delhi. Pernod Richard India Pvt. Ltd., 15th Floor, Building No.8C, DLF Cyber City, DLF Phase-2, Gurgaon. PAN: AAACS4781P ITA Nos.1607, 1608/Del/2018 & 2601/Del/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 DCIT, Vs. Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-31, Sudee…

Acer India Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the grounds relating to T

ITA 2837/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate & Shri Neeraj Jain &For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR ITAT)
Section 143(3)

…evidence that there exists an international transaction between the assessee and the AE. Needless to mention, that the existence of such a transaction cannot be a matter of inference. 15. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Whirlpool of India Ltd vs DCIT 381 ITR 154 has held that there should be some tangible evidence on record to demonstrate that there exists an international transaction in relation with incurring of AMP expenses for development of brand owned by the AE. In our considered opinion, in the absence of such demonstration, there is no question of undertaking any benchmarking of AMP expenses. The…

Whirlpool of India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Ltu Circle-2, New Delhi

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

ITA 9191/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Kumar, CIT/DR
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 35Section 92BSection 92C

…. 7. Ld. AR submitted that the facts relating to these international transactionsare identical all through the years and for the assessment year 2008-09 this issue was dealt with by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court and by way of the decision reported in 381 ITR 154, Hon’ble High Court held that there does not exist any arrangement or undertaking between the assessee and the associated enterprises in connection with incurring of the AMP expenses. He further submitted that such addition of the Hon’ble High Court is followed by the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the assessment years 2009-10 to 2014-15 and…

Brother International (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 15(1)(2) (Earlier the Income Tax Officer 10(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5075/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Acit-15(1)(2), M/S Brother International Room No. 483A, 4Th Floor, Vs. (India) Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 703/704, Powai Plaza, Mumbai-400020. Hiranandani Business Park, Powai, Mumbai-400076. Pan No. Aadcb0263E Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Brother International The Assistant (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Commissioner Of Income Unit No. 408, 4Th Floor, B- Tax, 15(1)(2), [Earlier The Wing, 215 Atrium, Andheri Income Tax Officer- Kurla Road, Andheri (East), 10(3)(1)], Room No. 483A, Mumbai-400059. 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020. Pan No. Aadcb0263E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan Ved, Mr. Pawan SharmaFor Respondent: Mr. Ashish Heliwal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 92C(3)

…an international transaction involving AMP expense with an ascertainable price is unable to be M/s Brother International (India) Pvt. Ltd. invoked to undertake a TP adjustment exercise. In Commissioner of Income Tax v. Whirpool of India Limited (2015) [2016] 381 ITR 154 (Delhi), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court again held that “where revenue has been unable to demonstrate by some tangible material that there is an international transaction involving AMP expenses between Indian subsidiary and foreign parent, revenue cannot proceed to determine ALP of AMP expenses by inferring existence of an international transaction…

Asst CIT 15(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Brother International (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 4750/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Acit-15(1)(2), M/S Brother International Room No. 483A, 4Th Floor, Vs. (India) Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 703/704, Powai Plaza, Mumbai-400020. Hiranandani Business Park, Powai, Mumbai-400076. Pan No. Aadcb0263E Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Brother International The Assistant (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Commissioner Of Income Unit No. 408, 4Th Floor, B- Tax, 15(1)(2), [Earlier The Wing, 215 Atrium, Andheri Income Tax Officer- Kurla Road, Andheri (East), 10(3)(1)], Room No. 483A, Mumbai-400059. 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020. Pan No. Aadcb0263E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan Ved, Mr. Pawan SharmaFor Respondent: Mr. Ashish Heliwal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 92C(3)

…an international transaction involving AMP expense with an ascertainable price is unable to be M/s Brother International (India) Pvt. Ltd. invoked to undertake a TP adjustment exercise. In Commissioner of Income Tax v. Whirpool of India Limited (2015) [2016] 381 ITR 154 (Delhi), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court again held that “where revenue has been unable to demonstrate by some tangible material that there is an international transaction involving AMP expenses between Indian subsidiary and foreign parent, revenue cannot proceed to determine ALP of AMP expenses by inferring existence of an international transaction…

Ngc Network India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 11(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6829/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 Ngc Network (India) Pvt. The Additional Cit Range 11(1), Ltd.,Star House Urmi Estate Room No. 467, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Vs. 95 Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Lower Parel (W), 400020. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aabcn1401A Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Debashis Chanda, CIT-DR &
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 92B(1)Section 92CSection 92C(4)

…Pvt. Ltd. 9 placed by him inter alia on the decision in Maruti Suzuki India Limited v. CIT [2016] 381 ITR 117 (Del.), Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Addl. CIT. (2015) [2016] 381 ITR 227 (Del.), CIT v. Whirpool of India Limited (2015) [2016] 381 ITR 154 (Del.), Honda Siel Power Products Limited v. Deputy CIT (2015) (94 CCH 0170) (Del.). Further, it is stated that the AMP expenses form part of the cost base to compute the margin earned by the appellant for benchmarking the international transactions in the distribution and advertisement airtime segments. Explaining that on a TNMM basis, the appel…

Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl. CIT., Special Range -8, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6813/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6813/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs Additional Commissioner Of 20Th -24Th Floors, Dlf Two Horizon Income Tax, Special Range-8 Center, Sector-13, Gurgaon, New Delhi-110002 Haryana-122002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacs5123K Assessee By : Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr & Date Of Hearing: 04.12.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.01.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR &
Section 144CSection 144C(10)Section 92C

…ble companies. This approach, to our mind, is contrary to law and untenable. 38. Our view is bolstered by the various decisions of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court and co-ordinate benches of this Tribunal in this regard. In Whirlpool of India Ltd. v. DCIT (2016) 381 ITR 154 (Del), the following relevant principles have been laid down by the Court which have been reiterated/followed in other decisions as well: (a) Sections 92B to 92F contemplate the existence of an international transaction as a pre-requisite for commencing 9 Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. the TP exercise. The Court observed that “to begin wi…

M/S. Xerox India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5528/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 92BSection 92C

…By now, it is settled principle of law that BLT is not a valid method for determining the existence of international transaction or for determination of ALP of such transactions. 22. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Whirlpool of India Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 154 (Delhi) decided the identical issue by returning following findings :- “34. The TP adjustment is not expected to be made by deducing from the difference between the 'excessive' AMP expenditure incurred by the Assessee and the AMP expenditure of a comparable entity that an international transaction exists and then proceed to make the adjustment…