“transfer pricing order”
The decision most relied on for transfer pricing order is Commissioner of Income Tax v. Roca Bathroom Products (P) ltd. (445 ITR 537), cited in 269 judgments on BharatTax.
Leading authorities on transfer pricing order
The time limit for the Assessing Officer to pass a final assessment order under Section 144C(13) following directions from the Dispute Resolution Panel is determined by the specific provisions of Section 153, particularly Section 153(2A).
Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, which preserves rights and liabilities under repealed statutes, does not automatically apply to a mere omission of a statutory provision unless the omitting enactment specifically provides for it, thereby affecting the continuation of pending proceedings.
Failure to follow the procedure laid down in Section 144C(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, constitutes a breach of mandatory provisions, rendering the final assessment order void.
A transfer pricing order passed after the expiry of the prescribed limitation period, computed in accordance with Section 153 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is barred by limitation and liable to be quashed.
Assessment orders made beyond the time limits prescribed under Section 153 of the Income-tax Act, considering the specific provisions for transfer pricing assessments, are liable to be quashed.
The benchmarking of interest rates on loans advanced to associated enterprises in foreign currency should consider LIBOR, comparing related transactions involving loan advancements and interest charges.
An order passed by the TPO is bad in law if it is beyond the limitation period prescribed under section 92CA(3A) read with section 153 of the Act.
A transfer pricing officer (TPO) must follow the prescribed method under section 92C for determining the arm's length price. If the TPO fails to do so, the matter cannot be remanded back to the TPO, and the ITAT order should be followed.
