“ international transaction ”

CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd.

The existence of an international transaction for Advertising and Marketing Promotion (AMP) expenditure requires the revenue to discharge the burden of proof. An explanation inserted under Section 92B does not automatically make AMP expenditure an international transaction.

345 ITR 241 · 2012 · High Court

422

India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (SC); and Vodafone International Holdings B.V v. Union of India

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.

341 ITR 1 · 2012 · Supreme Court

295

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT

Legitimate tax planning is permissible, allowing taxpayers to arrange their affairs to minimize tax liabilities while respecting the "look at test" for transaction genuineness and the separate entity principle in corporate taxation. The source of funds for treaty-beneficial structures does not automatically invalidate the transaction.

381 ITR 117 · 2016 · High Court

220

Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India

The Bright Line Test (BLT) is not a recognized method under the Income-tax Act and Rules for benchmarking advertising, marketing, and promotion (AMP) expenses or for determining the existence of an international transaction or its Arm's Length Price. The Revenue must first establish the existence and price of an international transaction before seeking an ALP adjustment.

368 ITR 1 · 2014 · High Court

172

Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT

The issue of shares and share premium is a capital account transaction, not an income-generating event, therefore Chapter X (Transfer Pricing) provisions are not attracted to deem notional or hypothetical income from such transactions.

24 ITR 506 · 1953 · Supreme Court

156

PCIT v. Redington (India) Ltd.

One cannot make a taxable profit or loss from transactions with oneself, as profit only arises from dealings with external third parties, even when transferring assets between different accounts or divisions of the same entity.

430 ITR 298 · 2021 · High Court

132

Bausch & Lomb Eye Care (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional CIT

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.

381 ITR 227 · 2016 · High Court

127

ITA 1492/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

The existence of an international transaction must be established before its arm's length price can be determined. An alleged 'excessive' AMP expenditure cannot unilaterally expand the scope of an international transaction if its existence is contested.

Judgments citing international transaction

Luxottica India Eyewear Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Manish Agarwalluxottica India Eyewear Pvt. Ltd., Asst. Cit, 7Th Floor, Dlf Building No.9, Circle-15(2), Tower-B, Phase-Iii, Dlf Cyber Vs. New Delhi. City, Gurgaon-122002, Haryana. Pan-Aabcl3871C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Adv., Ca Department By Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jaiswal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 30.01.2015 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S.144C(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’) In Compliance To The Direction Given By Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) Vide Order Dated 15.12.2014 For Asst. Year 2010-11. 2. In The Present Appeal, The Co-Ordinate Bench Vide Order Dated 26.05.2017 In Ita No.1492/Del/2015 Has Remand The Issue Of Tp Adjustment Towards Alleged Amp Expenses To The File Of Tpo To Decide Afresh With Certain Directions, However, Luxottica India Eyewear Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Ground In Respect Of Tp Adjustment Made Towards International Transactions Of Import Of Finished Goods Remained Un-Adjudicated.

Section 143(3)Section 92C

decide afresh with certain directions, however, Luxottica India Eyewear Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT ground in respect of TP Adjustment made towards International transactions of import of finished goods remained un-adjudicated. 3. Against the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court wherein ... applying Transaction Net Margin Method ("TNMM") as the Most appropriate Method ("MAM") under section 92C of the Act to determine ALP of impugned international transaction is completely arbitrary and calls for being reversed. 4.2 That the Ld. AO/Ld. TPO/Hon'ble DRP while rejecting RPM as the MAM, erred in ignoring

DCIT, Circle 3(4), Mumbai vs. Tata Consultancy Services Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of both, revenue and assessee are partly

ITA 2245/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR

ITA 2244/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Pricing Documentation Report maintained by the appellant in good faith and with due diligence. 3. Provision of software & consultancy services 3.1 Re-characterization of international transaction The Id. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts of the case in not accepting the Appellant as the tested party even though ... international transaction during the year under reference was provision of services by the Appellant to its AEs. 3.2 Disregarding the legally binding agreements between the Appellant and its AEs The Id. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts, in disregarding the contractual terms of the legally binding agreement

DCIT, Circle 3 4, Mumbai vs. Tata Consultancy Services Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of both, revenue and assessee are partly

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR

ITA 2243/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

DCIT, Circle 3(4), Mumbai vs. Tata Consultancy Services Limited, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

ITA 1518/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Tata Consultancy Services Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Incometax 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of both, revenue and assessee are partly allowed for all the three assessment years

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate and Shri Manish Kumar Kanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR

Section 1Section 92CSection 92C(3)

Tata Consultancy Services Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Incometax 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of both, revenue and assessee are partly

ITA 1517/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR

ITA 1516/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Tata Consultancy Services Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Incometax 3(4), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

ITA 5786/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2005-06

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Cargil India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2005-06 Acit, Circle5(2), Vs. M/S Cargil India Pvt.Ltd. New Delhi -110001 111 Rectangle–I Saket District Centre New Delhi Pan No. Aaacc3269J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

Transfer Pricing Guidelines on 'Review of Comparability and of Profit Methods' issued by the OECD and also "Guidance note on report on international transactions under section 92E of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Transfer Pricing)" issued by Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI). The appellant has argued that ... price reported in Kingsman publication after converting into FOB value. The difference of arm’s length should be calculated accordingly. The adjustment to the international transaction is subject applicability of +/-5% as per proviso to section 92CA(2) of the I.T. Act.” 9.3 We noted that the assessee

Nirjeet Singh, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 52(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5151/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Smt. Renu Jauhriassessment Year: 2022-23 Shri Nirjeet Singh Vs Ito Ward 52(1) 117, Palika Bazar New Delhi Connaught Place New Delhi- 110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ablps0458C

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, SR. DR

Section 250Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 270A(9)(c)Section 274

account; (e) failure to record any receipt in books of account having a bearing on total income; and (f) failure to report any international transaction or any transaction deemed to be an international transaction or any specified domestic transaction, to which the provisions of Chapter X apply. ” 7. From

Gunmala Jain, Ajmer vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-2(2), Ajmer

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1262/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1262/JPR/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYears :2019-20 Gunmala Jain, बनाम 28 Abhi Lash Nikunj, Kalyan Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2) Colony, Ajmer Road Kekri, Ajmer स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./ PAN/GIR No.: ABRPJ 4764E Ajmer अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assesseeby :Sh. Sunil Porwal, CA (Thr.V.C.) राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary (Addl. CIT) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 18/1

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal, CA (Thr.V.C.)For Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary

Section 148Section 250Section 270ASection 80G

length price determined by the Transfer Pricing Officer, where the assessee had maintained information and documents as prescribed under section 92D, declared the international transaction under Chapter X, and, disclosed all the material facts relating to the transaction; and (e) the amount of undisclosed income referred to in section 271AAB ... failure to record any receipt in books of account having a bearing on total income; and 8 Gunmala Jain (f) failure to report any international transaction or any transaction deemed to be an international transaction or any specified domestic transaction, to which the provisions of Chapter X apply

Vestas Wind Technology India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. Jci, Co. Range-III, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 319/CHNY/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. Sriram Seshadri, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A R V Srinivasan, CIT for Shri. Bipin C.N., CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)Section 92B

inapplicable to the facts of the present case. For the relevant assessment year (i.e., AY 2008-09), transfer pricing provisions were confined only to international transactions. There was no legislative framework to apply transfer pricing principles to domestic transactions. It was only with effect from AY 2013-14 that

Shakti Hormann Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

ITA 917/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.917/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2020-21) Shakti Hormann Private Limited, Hyderabad. Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad. Pan: Aadcs4024Q (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 15/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of 19/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Company Is Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “A.O.”) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”) Dated 25/07/2024 For The

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Ms. U. Mini Chandran

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 92C

determination of arm's length price and that no adjustment has been proposed. 4.0 Erred in upholding adjustment of Rs.5,42,937/- towards international transaction of Interest on unsecured Compulsorily convertible debentures given to AE's. 4.1 The Ld. AO erred in upholding the adjustment of Rs.5,42,937/-made ... erred in holding that the RBI guidelines pertain to FDI policies and are not directly applicable for determining the Arm's length price of International transactions under the Income tax Act. 4.5 The Ld. AO erred in holding that the TPO had provided a robust analysis and reasonable basis

Sresta Natural Bioproducts Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 711/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.711/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2020-2021 Sresta Natural Bioproducts Private Limited, Hyderabad. The Dcit, Circle-3(1), Vs. Pin – 500 081. Hyderabad – 500 081. Telangana. Telangana. Pan Aahcs9571J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca P Murali Mohan Rao राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19.12.2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 153Section 92CSection 92C(3)

outstanding receivables relate to sale of services and not in the nature of any advance/loans and therefore, it cannot come under the purview of 'International Transaction' as defined u/s 92B of the Act. 5.5. The Ld. TPO erred in re-characterizing the nature of transaction from 'Receivable' to 'loan' which ... includes a substantial profit element with interest aspect being embedded in it and therefore, interest on receivables cannot be coined as a separate "international transaction' as envisaged u/s 92B of the Act. 5.7. The Ld. AO ought to have appreciated the fact that the assessee is following a policy

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore vs. Ms Zyme Solution Private Limited, Bangalore

Accordingly the appeal of the ld. AO and the CO of the assessee are partly allowed,

ITA 1885/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Balusamy, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 92C

enable Services [ITeS] to its parent company, ITA No.1885 & CO 42/Bang/2024 Page 4 of 8 Zyme Solutions Inc. USA. The assessee has entered into international transaction for which reference was made to the DCIT (TP), 2(2)(2), Bangalore [ld. TPO] who pass a TP order u/s. 92CA ... determining the ALP of the international transaction of Rs.2,87,20,804. Based on this, assessment order was passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.6,78,06,461. The Assessee preferred appeal before ld CIT (A) who decided

Smt Suruchi Satish Sarmalkar, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward-32(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5942/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 154Section 250Section 270A

Aamir Khatri, Mumbai vs. DCIT-17(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal ITA No

ITA 3586/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263

defines “operating revenue” in an inclusive manner to mean “the revenue earned by the assessee in the previous year in relation to the international transaction during the course of its normal operations but not including the following, namely…….. (vii) other incomes not relating to normal operations of the assessee”. From

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

ITA 2767/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

ITA 2367/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Assessee works on Power solutions in the states of Karnataka, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh. The Ld.AO further noted that, the assessee entered into international transactions with its associated enterprises that exceeded the threshold limit and accordingly reference was made u/s 92CA(1) of the Act to Ld.TPO to determine ... such international transactions. 6 4. 2. On receipt of the reference, the Ld.TPO called for details of international transactions in Form 3CEB alongwith various other evidence and documents to support the computation of ALP in relation to the international transactions, assessee had with its AE along with other specified domestic

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

ITA 2366/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Assessee works on Power solutions in the states of Karnataka, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh. The Ld.AO further noted that, the assessee entered into international transactions with its associated enterprises that exceeded the threshold limit and accordingly reference was made u/s 92CA(1) of the Act to Ld.TPO to determine ... such international transactions. 4. 2. On receipt of the reference, the Ld.TPO called for details of international transactions in Form 3CEB alongwith various other evidence and documents to support the computation of ALP in relation to the international transactions, assessee had with its AE along with other specified domestic transactions

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

ITA 2365/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Assessee works on Power solutions in the states of Karnataka, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh. The Ld.AO further noted that, the assessee entered into international transactions with its associated enterprises that exceeded the threshold limit and accordingly reference was made u/s 92CA(1) of the Act to Ld.TPO to determine ... such international transactions. 6 I.T.A. No. 2364/Mum/2025 I.T.A. No. 2365/Mum/2025 I.T.A. No. 2366/Mum/2025 I.T.A. No. 2367/Mum/2025 I.T.A. No. 2767/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 112/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 111/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 113/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 114/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 115/Mum/2025 4. 2. On receipt of the reference, the Ld.TPO called for details of international transactions

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years under consideration stands partly allowed and cross appeals filed by the assesse stands dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()