← All Phrases

“international transaction”

Transfer PricingSection 92BSection 92B3,408 judgments

The decision most relied on for international transaction is Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (374 ITR 118), cited in 499 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on international transaction

Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
374 ITR 118 · 2015 · High Court
499
citing judgments

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.

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.

India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (SC); and Vodafone International Holdings B.V v. Union of India
341 ITR 1 · 2012 · Supreme Court
295
citing judgments

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.

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT
381 ITR 117 · 2016 · High Court
220
citing judgments

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.

Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India
368 ITR 1 · 2014 · High Court
172
citing judgments

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.

Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT
24 ITR 506 · 1953 · Supreme Court
156
citing judgments

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.

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.

Bausch & Lomb Eye Care (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional CIT
381 ITR 227 · 2016 · High Court
127
citing judgments

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

O.C Tanner India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle -2(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5785/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2021-22 O.C. Tanner India Pvt. Ltd., Dy. Cit, Circle-2(3)(1), No. 2, Lave 7 Tower 2, Phase Ii, 552, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Raiaskaran Techpark Andheri Vs. Maharishi Karve Road, Kurla Road, Andheri East, Mumbai-400020. Sakinaka S.O. Mumbai, Mumbai-400072. Pan No. Aabco 1031 F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Vijay Mehta, CA
Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

complied 61 (in short ‘the Act’) were issued and complied 61 (in short ‘the Act’) were issued and complied with. In view of international transaction carried out by the with. In view of international transaction carried out by the with. In view of international transaction carried out by the assessee ... length price (ALP) of those international arm’s length price (ALP) of those international arm’s length price (ALP) of those international transactions was referred to ferred to the ld. Transfer Pricing Officer (T the ld. Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO). The ld. TPO proposed adjustment proposed adjustments to the value

Creative Ashtech Power Projects Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-14(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1587/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarcreative Ashtech Power V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Projects Private Limited, 7Th बनाम Income Tax, Circle– Floor, Raheja Point 1, Opp. 14(1)(2), Room No. 455, Vakola Market Nehru Road, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Santacruz (East), Mumbai– Marg, Mumbai – 400020, 400055, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcd1054F Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Sanghvi,ARFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra S. Mahajan, (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 270A(9)(e)

books of account; (e)failure to record any receipt in books of account having a bearing on total income; (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

M/S. Tbea Shenyang Trasformer Gropup Company Limited, Vadodara vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Int. Tax., Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 581/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 581/Ahd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बनाम/ M/S. Tbea Shenyang Deputy Commissioner Of Transformer Group Income Tax Vs. Company Limited International Taxation, National Highway No.-8, Vadodara Villae : Miyagam, Karja, Vadodara, Gujarat - 390007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadct4557F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Arpit Jain, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit. Dr 24/04/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 22/07/2025 O R D E R Per Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Arpit Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Shah, CIT. DR
Section 143(3)Section 9Section 92C

course of which, the Assessing Officer ( AO ) noticed that even though no Form 3CEB was filed by the assesse, it had entered into international transaction with the head office (TBEA) in ITA No. 581/Ahd/2017 [M/s. TBEA Shenyang Transformer Group Company Limited vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2012-13 - 3 – China ... made by the AO to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for determination of Arm’s Length Price (ALP) of the international transaction executed between the head office and the project office. The assessee objected to the reference made by the AO to the TPO contending that the transaction between

Daido India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 1(1), Gurgaon

ITA 5761/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C

facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. TPO/DRP erred in making adjustment of Rs.4,39, 30,329 to the international transactions pertaining to Purchase of Raw Materials, Other Materials and Payment of Royalty segments u/s 92CA of the Act. 2 ITA No. 5761/Del/2018 Daido India ... vide his order dated 24/10/2017, determined the adjustment/difference on account of Arm's Length Price in respect of international transaction with Associated Enterprises at Rs. 8,77,88,022/- and was added to the return income of the Assessee company, following the order of the T.P.O., the draft assessment order

Spectraforce Technologies (India) Private Limited, Pune vs. ACIT, Circle 5, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 2853/PUN/2024[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jul 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri S. Raghunathan and Shri Abhiroop Bhargav KFor Respondent: Shri Prakash L. Pathade
Section 143(3)Section 92C(3)

AO/Ld. TPO/ DRP has erred in enhancing the income of Appellant by Rs. 2,90,89,437 while holding that the Appellant's international transaction pertaining to provision of Staff Augmentation Service ("SAs')- Export, to its Associated Enterprises ('AE'), even after reconstruction of segment by TPO, does not satisfy ... AO/Ld. TPO/DRP has erred in enhancing the income of Appellant by Rs. 2,90,89,437 while holding that the Appellant's international transaction pertaining to provision of Staff Augmentation Service ("SAs')- Export, to its Associated Enterprises ('AE'), even after reconstruction of segment by TPO, does not satisfy

Samsung Sdi India Pvt Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, Circle-5(2)(1), Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5475/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 92C

manufacturer only for one month i.e., December 2019 before transitioning to distribution operation from 01.01.2020. The assessee has entered into the following international transactions 2 | P a g e ITA No.3472 & 5475/Del/2024 during the year under appeal hence, reported in the form 3CEB filed by the assessee ... order to determine the ALP of the international transactions entered by the assessee during the FY 2019-20 relevant to AY under appeal, made a reference to the AO technical unit u/s 92CA(3) of the Act. In compliance, the TPO vide order dated 28.07.2023 proposed total adjustment

Eli Lilly and Company (India) Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Gurgaon, Haryana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3500/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesheli Lilly & Company (India) Vs. Acit, Private Limited, Plot No 92, Circle-1(1), Sector 32, Institutional Area, Gurgaon, Haryana Jharsa, Gurgaon, Haryana, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaace8901F

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Jadav, CIT (DR)
Section 144C(5)Section 92C

holds 1% equity shares in assessee’s company. The ultimate holding company is Eli Lilly and Company, Netherland B.V.. There are various international transaction entered into by the assessee with its AEs which are listed in pages 2 and 3 of the order of the ld TPO. The assessee

Samsung Sdi India Pvt Ltd, Noida vs. Assessment Unit, Income-Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre New Delhi, New Delhi

ITA 3472/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 92C

manufacturer only for one month i.e., December 2019 before transitioning to distribution operation from 01.01.2020. The assessee has entered into the following international transactions during the year under appeal hence, reported in the form 3CEB filed by the assessee:- S.No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Nature ... shares Change in business model from manufacturing to trading Reimbursement of salary expenses International Amount 34229676 795965 48699076 8169448 849655 299999900 NA 4857276 Deemed international transactions 9 Purchase of raw material 9034750 10 Purchase of finished goods 585700000 11 Job work charges paid 18636546 12 Sale of raw materials (manufacturing

Ivy Software Development Services Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle -2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the ground no

ITA 73/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

companies. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s.143(2) of the Act was issued on 17.08.2019. In view of International transaction with Associated Enterprises (“AEs”), the matter was referred to Learned Transfer Pricing Officer (“Ld. TPO”) for determination of Arm’s Length Price ... No.73/Hyd/2022 19 contention of the Ld. AR and hold that e-infochips is functionally dissimilar and unsuitable as a comparable for benchmarking the international transaction. 15. As far as exclusion of Wipro is concerned, we have gone through the specific pages of the annual report of Wipro as referred

Thermo Fisher Scientific India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 2458/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Amol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 32(1)

erred in confirming the upward adjustment of Rs. 6,42,81,181 to the income of the Appellant in relation to the international transaction of purchase of finished goods; and in doing so the learned DCIT and Hon'ble DRP grossly erred in agreeing with the learned TPO's action ... erred in confirming the upward adjustment of Rs. 4,41,90,721 to the income of the Appellant in relation to the international transaction of receipt of indenting commission; and in doing so the learned DCIT and Hon'ble DRP grossly erred in agreeing with the learned TPO's action

Jubilant Foodworks Ltd, Noida vs. ACIT, Circle, 5(1)(1)., Gautam Buddha Nager

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

ITA 2310/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144(1)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 924ASection 928Section 92CSection 92F

case was selected for scrutiny u/s CASS and notice u/s 143(2) issued on 22.09.2019. Since the assessee was entered into international transactions with related parties therefore, the case of the assessee was referred to Transfer Pricing Officer (“TPO”) for Page | 1 determination of Arm’s Length Price ... Honorable Jurisdictional High Court, thereby not following the judicial discipline as mandated by law. 5.2 Incorrectly holding that AMP expenditure constitutes an international transaction under section 928 read with section 92F(v) of the Act. 5.3. Disregarding the nature of AMP expenses incurred by the Appellant and incorrectly holding that

M/S Gujarat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 2539/DEL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Bhopal Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 92C

made by the AO to the ld. TPO to determine the ‘arm's length price' u/s 92CA (3) of the Act in respect of ‘international transactions' entered into by the assessee during the year under consideration. In response to notice u/s 92CA ... 5358/Del/2010 & ITA No.2539/Del/2017 Gujarat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi Page 3 of 66 3.1 The assessee during the relevant previous year entered into several international transactions including export of float glass to its associated enterprise. In the Transfer Pricing Documentation, the international transactions were benchmarked using Transactional Net Margin Method (“TNMM

Gujarat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5358/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 92C

made by the AO to the ld. TPO to determine the ‘arm's length price' u/s 92CA (3) of the Act in respect of ‘international transactions' entered into by the assessee during the year under consideration. In response to notice u/s 92CA ... Rs.307.08 crores with operating profit of Rs.65.38 crores, being 27% on sales. 3.1 The assessee during the relevant previous year entered into several international transactions including export of float glass to its associated enterprise. In the Transfer Pricing Documentation, the international transactions were benchmarked using Transactional Net Margin Method (“TNMM

Gujrat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4856/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhsl.No. Ita No. Filed By Assessee/Revenue Assessment Year Authority Passing The Order

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Bhopal Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 92C

made by the AO to the ld. TPO to determine the ‘arm's length price' u/s 92CA (3) of the Act in respect of ‘international transactions' entered into by the assessee during the year under consideration. In response to notice u/s 92CA ... 5358/Del/2010 & ITA No.2539/Del/2017 Gujarat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi Page 3 of 66 3.1 The assessee during the relevant previous year entered into several international transactions including export of float glass to its associated enterprise. In the Transfer Pricing Documentation, the international transactions were benchmarked using Transactional Net Margin Method (“TNMM

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Gujarat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4791/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 92C

made by the AO to the ld. TPO to determine the ‘arm's length price' u/s 92CA (3) of the Act in respect of ‘international transactions' entered into by the assessee during the year under consideration. In response to notice u/s 92CA ... Rs.307.08 crores with operating profit of Rs.65.38 crores, being 27% on sales. 3.1 The assessee during the relevant previous year entered into several international transactions including export of float glass to its associated enterprise. In the Transfer Pricing Documentation, the international transactions were benchmarked using Transactional Net Margin Method (“TNMM

Gujarat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 159/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 92C

made by the AO to the ld. TPO to determine the ‘arm's length price' u/s 92CA (3) of the Act in respect of ‘international transactions' entered into by the assessee during the year under consideration. In response to notice u/s 92CA ... Rs.307.08 crores with operating profit of Rs.65.38 crores, being 27% on sales. 3.1 The assessee during the relevant previous year entered into several international transactions including export of float glass to its associated enterprise. In the Transfer Pricing Documentation, the international transactions were benchmarked using Transactional Net Margin Method (“TNMM

Gujarat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 158/DEL/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Bhopal Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 92C

made by the AO to the ld. TPO to determine the ‘arm's length price' u/s 92CA (3) of the Act in respect of ‘international transactions' entered into by the assessee during the year under consideration. In response to notice u/s 92CA ... Rs.307.08 crores with operating profit of Rs.65.38 crores, being 27% on sales. 3.1 The assessee during the relevant previous year entered into several international transactions including export of float glass to its associated enterprise. In the Transfer Pricing Documentation, the international transactions were benchmarked using Transactional Net Margin Method (“TNMM

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gujrat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 157/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Bhopal Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 92C

made by the AO to the ld. TPO to determine the ‘arm's length price' u/s 92CA (3) of the Act in respect of ‘international transactions' entered into by the assessee during the year under consideration. In response to notice u/s 92CA ... Rs.307.08 crores with operating profit of Rs.65.38 crores, being 27% on sales. 3.1 The assessee during the relevant previous year entered into several international transactions including export of float glass to its associated enterprise. In the Transfer Pricing Documentation, the international transactions were benchmarked using Transactional Net Margin Method (“TNMM

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Gujrat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4859/DEL/2009[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Bhopal Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 92C

made by the AO to the ld. TPO to determine the ‘arm's length price' u/s 92CA (3) of the Act in respect of ‘international transactions' entered into by the assessee during the year under consideration. In response to notice u/s 92CA ... Rs.307.08 crores with operating profit of Rs.65.38 crores, being 27% on sales. 3.1 The assessee during the relevant previous year entered into several international transactions including export of float glass to its associated enterprise. In the Transfer Pricing Documentation, the international transactions were benchmarked using Transactional Net Margin Method (“TNMM

Suntec Business Solutions Private Limited, Chennai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai

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

ITA 3252/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri AR.V Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

During the course of assessment proceedings, the case was referred to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to determine the arm’s length price of international transaction undertaken by the assessee with its AE. The TPO passed an order u/s.92CA of the Act on 23.10.2023 wherein, he proposed downward adjustment ... India (P) Ltd., vs. DCIT reported in 368 ITR 469 (Delhi) had held that when assessee had used TNMM method to benchmark all its international transaction, it is not open to TPO to select only one element therein to an entirely different method namely CUP method in that case