← All Phrases

“associated enterprise”

Transfer PricingSection 92ASection 92A2,562 judgments

The decision most relied on for associated enterprise is CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. (345 ITR 241), cited in 422 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on associated enterprise

CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd.
345 ITR 241 · 2012 · High Court
422
citing judgments

Transfer pricing adjustments for outstanding receivables are permissible only if the Tax Officer establishes, through analysis over a period, a pattern indicating an international transaction intended to benefit an associated enterprise. The Tax Officer cannot question purely business decisions like royalty payments or exceed jurisdiction by applying cost-benefit analysis to determine the arm's length price of services.

Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
118 ITR 261 · 1979 · Supreme Court
323
citing judgments

An expense incurred by an assessee for its own business, such as advertising, marketing, and promotional (AMP) expenses, cannot be disallowed merely because it incidentally or indirectly benefits the assessee's sister concerns or associated enterprises.

CIT v. Everest Kento Cylinders Ltd.
378 ITR 57 · 2015 · High Court
304
citing judgments

Corporate guarantee fees are subject to transfer pricing rules, and adjustments may be needed to account for differences between corporate guarantees and more liquid bank guarantees when determining arm's length price.

CIT v. Cotton Naturals (I) (P.) Ltd.
55 Taxmann.com 523 · 2015 · High Court
273
citing judgments

The interest rate for benchmarking foreign currency loans advanced to Associated Enterprises should be the market-determined rate applicable to the currency of the loan, such as LIBOR for US Dollar loans, rather than a domestic lending rate like the Indian PLR.

CIT v. Agnity India Technologies (P.) Ltd.
36 Taxmann.com 289 · 2013 · High Court
171
citing judgments

The Delhi High Court holds that Infosys Ltd. is not comparable to a captive software development service provider for transfer pricing analysis, given its huge turnover, high profit margins, ownership of intangible intellectual property rights, branded products, and differing risk profile.

DIT v. Morgan Stanley Co. Inc.
399 ITR 34 · 2017 · Supreme Court
162
citing judgments

Once a transfer pricing analysis has been undertaken for an Indian associated enterprise, no further profits are attributable to it as a Permanent Establishment, thereby extinguishing the need for additional profit attribution.

PCIT v. Redington (India) Ltd.
430 ITR 298 · 2021 · High Court
132
citing judgments

A corporate guarantee issued to Associated Enterprises (AEs) is an international transaction under Section 92B, requiring adjustments for guarantee commission due to inherent risk. The reasonable arm's length rate for benchmarking such corporate guarantees can be determined using internal or external comparable uncontrolled prices.

Sony India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT
114 ITD 448 · 2008 · ITAT
131
citing judgments

For transfer pricing purposes, functionally dissimilar entities that have significant business differences must be excluded from the list of comparables for benchmarking analysis. It also provides guidance on the non-allocation of advertisement, marketing, and promotion (AMP) expenses to other entities when incurred solely for the assessee's business.

Judgments citing associated enterprise

Fidelity Information Services India Private Limited, Punjab vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 998/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 998/Chd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Fidelity Information Services Vs The Dcit, Chandigarh, India Private Ltd., 2Nd A-45, Industrial Area, Sector 74, Phase 8B, Sas Nagar. स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aagcs0395D अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By: Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate & Ms. Sumisha, Ca Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.05.2025 Hybrid Hearing Order Per Raj Pal Yadav, Vp The Assessee Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal Against The Assessment Order Dated 31.07.2024 Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13)/144B Of The Income Tax Act In

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate & Ms. Sumisha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234ASection 270A

held that where the foreign travel expenses were part of the cost on which the mark up was charged by the assessee from its Associated Enterprises, it stand to reason that the foreign travel expenses were agreed to be incurred by virtue of the agreement entered into between the parties ... expenses and on which mark up has been charged by the assessee as part of its billing/invoicing and reporting of the revenues from the Associated Enterprises, we find that the assessee has duly demonstrated the same before the ld CIT(A) as evident from the following table at paperbook page

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 281/AHD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 35Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 92C

Form No. 3CEB. The TPO, vide order passed under section 92CA(3) of the Act dated 31.10.2018, proposed certain adjustments primarily relating to Associate Enterprises (AEs). Based on the TPO’s report and independent examination, the AO completed the assessment under section 143(3) read with section 144C ... passed by the CIT(A). The principal issues raised in the assessee’s appeal pertain to transfer pricing adjustments on interest on advances to associated enterprises, transfer pricing adjustment on notional interest on outstanding receivables, disallowance of weighted deduction under section 35(2AB), and an additional legal ground regarding allowability

Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 222/AHD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 35Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 92C

Form No. 3CEB. The TPO, vide order passed under section 92CA(3) of the Act dated 31.10.2018, proposed certain adjustments primarily relating to Associate Enterprises (AEs). Based on the TPO’s report and independent examination, the AO completed the assessment under section 143(3) read with section 144C ... passed by the CIT(A). The principal issues raised in the assessee’s appeal pertain to transfer pricing adjustments on interest on advances to associated enterprises, transfer pricing adjustment on notional interest on outstanding receivables, disallowance of weighted deduction under section 35(2AB), and an additional legal ground regarding allowability

Jungheinrich Lift Truck India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assessment Unit, National E Assessment Centre- Delhi, Delhi

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

ITA 4260/MUM/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanvs. Assessment Jungheinrich Lift Truck Unit/Nfac/Dcit India Private Limited Circle 15(1)(2), 4Th Floor, Delphi A Wing, Mumbai Central Avenue, Aayakar Bhavan, Hiranandani, Business Mumbai. Park, Powai, Mumbai, Maharashtra-400 076 Pan/Gir No. Aaccj7808G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajit Jain / Shri Siddesh Chaugule / Shri Rishab Parekh, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Kiran Unavekar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm: This Appeal Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 26.06.2024 Passed By Assessment Unit (Hereinafter Referred As Ld. Ao) For Ay 2020-21 In Pursuance To The Direction Of Ld. Drp-1, Mumbai Dated 14.06.2024

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 43A

transaction value of INR 75,08,637 at NIL without appreciating the fact that such expenses are third party costs which were reimbursed to Associated Enterprises ("AE") on cost-to-cost basis, without any mark-up. 2.2 Without prejudice to the above ground in 2.1, the learned ... length price by adopting ‘no other method’. During the year under consideration, the assessee has paid Rs. 75,08,633/- to its associated enterprises and claimed the same amount to be on account of reimbursement of expenses. In transfer pricing study report, it was stated that Associated Enterprises