Yum Restaurants (India) P. Ltd. v. ITO

380 ITR 637High Court2016#4739 most cited

What is Yum Restaurants (India) P. Ltd. v. ITO authority for?

Advertising, marketing, and promotion (AMP) expenses can qualify as an international transaction, but the burden of proving this lies with the revenue.

25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Yum Restaurants India · ITO · 380 ITR 637 · AMP expenses · international transaction · onus on revenue · transfer pricing · Delhi High Court

Also reported as

66 Taxmann.com 47
Read the full judgment

Judgments citing Yum Restaurants (India) P. Ltd. v. ITO

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Bose Corporation India P. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2523/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: S/Shri Divyanshu Agrawal &For Respondent: Smt. Mona Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C

…(2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del.) in which AMP expenses have been held to be international transaction and the matter of determination of ALP has been restored to the TPO. 25. Furthermore, in the judgment cited as Yum Restaurants (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO – (2016) 380 ITR 637 (Del) and Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. or AY 2010-11 delivered on 28.01.2016, Hon’ble High Court restored the issue, “as to whether AMP expenses is international transaction for fresh determination.” 15 ITA No.1509/Del./2014 ITA No.2523/Del./2014 26. Furthermore, the issue in question as to whether AMP expenses are in…

Reebok India Company, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 954/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.M. Shivakumar, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C

…s a part of the batch of appeals decided by the Hon’ble High Court in the lead case of Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (supra). He also relied on a later judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Yum Restaurants (India) P. Ltd. vs. ITO (2016) 380 ITR 637 (Del) and still another judgment dated 28.1.2016 of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. (for the AY 2010-11) in which the question as to whether AMP expense is an international transaction has been restored for a fresh determination. It was argued, similar to Nikon’s case (supra), that the judgme…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Reebok India Company, New Delhi

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

ITA 1620/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.M. Shivakumar, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C

…s a part of the batch of appeals decided by the Hon’ble High Court in the lead case of Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (supra). He also relied on a later judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Yum Restaurants (India) P. Ltd. vs. ITO (2016) 380 ITR 637 (Del) and still another judgment dated 28.1.2016 of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. (for the AY 2010-11) in which the question as to whether AMP expense is an international transaction has been restored for a fresh determination. It was argued, similar to Nikon’s case (supra), that the judgme…

Louis Vuitton India Retail Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 775/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, Shri Gaurav GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Peeyush Jain, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…0 which AMP expenses have been held to be an international transaction and the matter of determination of its ALP has been restored. He also relied on a later judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Yum Restaurants (India) P. Ltd. vs. ITO (2016) 380 ITR 637 (Del) and still another judgment dated 28.1.2016 of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. (for the AY 2010-11) in which the question as to whether AMP expenses is an international transaction has been restored for a fresh determination. It was argued, similar to Nikon’s case (supra), that the judgm…

Lg Life Sciences India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1818/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu S. Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR
Section 37(1)Section 92Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘I’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1818/Del/2015 (Assessment Year 2010-11) L G Life sciences India P. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, Circle 15(1), S-48, 2nd Floor, New Delhi Janta Market, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi-110 027 GIR / PAN :AAACL8019R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by :Shri Himanshu S. Sinha, Adv. Shri Yeeshu Arora, CA Ms. Vrinda Tulsian, Adv. Respondent by :Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR Date of hearing: 18.07.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 02.08.2016 ORDER PER BEENA A. PILLAI, JM: The presen…