← 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

Trend Micro India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-25(2), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 8751/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2013-14 Trend Micro India Private Limited, Vs Acit, 10Th Floor, Eros Corporate Tower, Circle-25(2), Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aacct2082Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate & Shri S.S. Tomar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2024

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C

invoked appropriately and the assessee should have been given benefit of the fact that arm’s length price of international transactions were calculated with bona fides, in good faith and with due diligence. However, the CIT(A) was not satisfied and sustained the addition with the following findings ... erred in upholding the action of the AO levying penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, on addition on account of alleged international transaction of interest on receivables that should’ve been charged, disregarding the submissions of the Appellant. 6.1 Without prejudice, the CIT(A) has erred

Zydus Lifesciences Limited (Formerly Known As Cadila Healthcare Ltd.), Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 162/AHD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 162/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 92BSection 92C

return was duly processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. Upon selection for scrutiny under CASS, as there was international transaction as well as specified domestic transactions covered under Section 92B and 92BA of the Act respectively, the case was referred to the TPO, Ahmedabad by and under letter ... income from house property, capital gain and other sources. During the course of assessment proceeding, it was noticed that the assessee had entered into international transaction as well specified domestic transaction. Further that, it was noticed that transfer pricing adjustment of Rs.39,94,66,330/- in assessee

The Dy. CIT., Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Invida India Pvt.Ltd. ( Now Known As Menarini India Pvt. Ltd.), Ahmedabad

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1316/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

with the other two products and sold two independent customers on wholesale basis. During the year under consideration the assessee company entered into following international transactions with its associated enterprises, the details of which are as under: S No. Name of Associated Enterprise Description Amount 1. Invida Holdings Private Royalty ... proceedings, the authorized representatives of the assessee filed Transfer Pricing documents and filed detailed submissions. The Assessing Officer observed that in respect of the international transactions representing payment of royalty, management fees and IT allocation cost, the conclusion arrived by the assessee, in respect of the arm’s length nature

Uttam Energy Limited, Pune vs. ACIT Circle-12, Pune

Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2033/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2033/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Uttam Energy Limited, The Acit, Circle-12, Mahendra Chamber, Mayfair V Pune. Co-Op Housing Society, S A-4, Dhole Patil Road, Pune – 411001. Pan: Aabcu4100H Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By Shri Ch Naniwadekar & Kiran Sanmane – Ar;S Revenue By Shri Deepak Garg – Cit Date Of Hearing 16/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30/05/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Of The Learned Acit, Circle-12, Pune Passed U/Sec. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short "The Act") After Giving Effect To The Learned Drp’S Order Dated 24.09.2019. 1.1 The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 92BSection 92C

sections 92, 92C, 92D and 92E, "specified domestic transaction" in case of an assessee means any of the following transactions, not being an international transaction, namely:— (i) any expenditure in respect of which payment has been made or is to be made to a person referred to in clause ... sections 92, 92C, 92D and 92E, "specified domestic transaction" in case of an assessee means any of the following transactions, not being an international transaction, namely:— (i) 38[***] (ii) any transaction referred to in section 80A; (iii) any transfer of goods or services referred to in sub-section

Jesudason Biji, Chennai vs. Office of Income Tax Officer Int. Taxn Ward1(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 567/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 May 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Swaroop, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 54ESection 54F

claimed excessive loss, deduction, allowance or relief in the return; (ba) where the assessee has failed to furnish a report in respect of any international transaction which he was so required under section 92E; (c) where an assessment has been made, but— (i) income chargeable to tax has been under

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation-4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Star Cruise Management Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

ITA 3886/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jishaan JainFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant
Section 250Section 5(2)(a)Section 9(1)(i)

facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in holding that if the consideration in the international transaction between the assessee and Star Travel (India) Travel Services Put Lid ("SCITSPL‟) is at an arm‟s length price, nothing further cut of the revenue ... facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the ld CIT(A) erred in holding that of the consideration in the international transaction between the assessee and Star Travel India) Travel Services Put Lid ("SCITSPL‟) is at an arm‟s length price, nothing further out of the revenue

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation-4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Star Cruise Management Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

ITA 3873/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jishaan JainFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant
Section 250Section 5(2)(a)Section 9(1)(i)

facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in holding that if the consideration in the international transaction between the assessee and Star Travel (India) Travel Services Put Lid ("SCITSPL‟) is at an arm‟s length price, nothing further cut of the revenue ... facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the ld CIT(A) erred in holding that of the consideration in the international transaction between the assessee and Star Travel India) Travel Services Put Lid ("SCITSPL‟) is at an arm‟s length price, nothing further out of the revenue

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation-4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Star Cruise Management Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

ITA 3871/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jishaan JainFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant
Section 250Section 5(2)(a)Section 9(1)(i)

facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in holding that if the consideration in the international transaction between the assessee and Star Travel (India) Travel Services Put Lid ("SCITSPL‟) is at an arm‟s length price, nothing further cut of the revenue ... facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the ld CIT(A) erred in holding that of the consideration in the international transaction between the assessee and Star Travel India) Travel Services Put Lid ("SCITSPL‟) is at an arm‟s length price, nothing further out of the revenue

DCIT, Circle 3(1) (1), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. Ricardo Uk Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1410/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

basis of arm's length principle we have quoted Article 7(2) of the DTAA. According to the AAR where there is an international transaction under which a nonresident compensates a PE at arm's length price, no further profits would be attributable in India. In this connection

DCIT Circle-3(1)(1). Intl. Taxation, New Delhi vs. Ricardo Uk Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1409/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

basis of arm's length principle we have quoted Article 7(2) of the DTAA. According to the AAR where there is an international transaction under which a nonresident compensates a PE at arm's length price, no further profits would be attributable in India. In this connection

DCIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Intl. Taxation, New Delhi vs. Ricardo Uk Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1408/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

basis of arm's length principle we have quoted Article 7(2) of the DTAA. According to the AAR where there is an international transaction under which a nonresident compensates a PE at arm's length price, no further profits would be attributable in India. In this connection

DCIT Circle-10(1), New Delhi vs. Htc India Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1785/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Kr. Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92BSection 92C

application of TNMM on entity level, the TPO proposed transfer pricing adjustment amounting to Rs.3.31 crore by determining Nil ALP of the three international transactions under the CUP method by basing his conclusion on the fact that the assessee did not avail any services inasmuch as no benefit was derived ... Explanation 7 to section 271(1), which reads as under:- "Explanation 7.—Where in the case of an assessee who has entered into an international transaction or specified domestic transaction defined in section 92B, any amount is added or disallowed in computing the total income under sub-section

ACIT, Corporate Circle-3(1), Chennai vs. M/S Tvs Motor Company Limited, Chennai

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील िं./Ita No. 06/Chny/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2016-17. The Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. Tvs Motor Company Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. Chaitanya, No.12, Corporate Circle-3(1), Khader Nawaz Khan Road, Chennai. Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 006. [Pan: Aaacs7032B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit ुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Vikaram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 12Section 153(1)Section 250(6)Section 9Section 92C

total income of Rs.288, 25,43,130/- including a revised return declaring income of Rs.289,78,02,600/-. As the assesse had declared international transactions a reference was made by the AO u/s 92CA(1) of the Act. The TPO made upward adjustments towards management support services and inter unit

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Essar Power Gujarat Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 137/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2014-15 Mr. Arun Bende M/S. Essar Power Asst. Commissioner Of Gujarat Ltd. 11Th Floor, Essar House, Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Mumbai. 11 K.K. Marg, Vs. Room No.504, 5Th Floor, Mahalaxmi, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- 400034. M.K.Road, Pan:Aabce7510K Mumbai- 400020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. Revenue By : Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. Cit), D.R. Date Of Hearing : 21 . 05 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29 . 05 . 2024 O R D E R Per: Ratnesh Nandan Sahay: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit Appeal Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (“Act” In Short) Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1058193153(1) Dated 23.11.2023 For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Following Grounds Of Appeal Have Been Raised:

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. CIT), D.R
Section 250Section 801ASection 92C

adjustment and said that considering the facts and circumstances of the case and documents furnished by the assessee, the value of the assessee's international transactions as well as specified domestic transactions with regards to arms length price is not being disturbed. Also assessee has not claimed u/s 801A

Saint Gobain Materiaux De Construction Sas, France vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (International Taxation), Circle - 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITANo

ITA 4244/MUM/2023[AY 2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Akram KhanFor Respondent: Ms. Sujatha Iyangar SRDR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 271BSection 92E

India Ltd on which tax was duly deducted by the Indian-AE @10%. This was the only income of the assessee and only the international transaction is entered this impugned assessment year. The assessee did not file the return of income in India U/s 139 of the Act. The notice ... under section 148 was issued and the return was filed. But the report in respect of international transaction in Form 3CEB was required to be filed as per section 92E of the Act for the impugned assessment year. But no form was filed with the ROI. The assessment was completed

Takenaka India Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon vs. JCIT (OSD) Circle-25(1), Gurgaon

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

ITA 5581/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year : 2012-13] M/S. Takenaka India Pvt.Ltd., Vs Cit (A)-44, First Floor, Tower-C, Vatika First New Delhi. India Place, Mehrauli Gurgaon Road, Gurgaon, Haryana-122002. Pan-Aadct6143P Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ashutosh Mohan Rastogi & Shri Dhruv Seth, Adv. Respondent By Shri Gaurav Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.05.2024 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (“Cit(A)”)-44, New Delhi Dated 24.04.2019 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Assailed The Correctness Of The Order On Following Grounds:-

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92D

case and in law, the Ld.TPO/AO and subsequently Ld. CIT (A) have erred in disregarding the arm's Length Price ('ALP') for international transactions as determined by Appellant in the TP documentation maintained by it in terms of Section 92D of the Act read with Rule ... notice, Ld. Authorized Representative (“AR”) of the assessee attended the assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer (“AO”) noticed that the assessee had entered into international transaction with its Associated Enterprises (“AEs”). Therefore, after obtaining the necessary approval from the Competent Authority in accordance with the provision of section 92CA

Tata International Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 14(3)1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 1195/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi a/w Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Ms. Dhivya Ruth SR.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92CSection 92C(2)

erred on facts and in law in disregarding the fact that: i.) Issuance of LOCs is not an international transaction, as the same does not have a bearing on the profit, income or losses, as the Appellant did not incur any cost or expenditure for issuing the LOG nor does ... contractual commitment. LOG i neither akin to guarantee nor possess any legal obligation as observed in case of a guarantee ani hence not an international transaction. 1.8 The Ld AO / Hon'ble DRP has erred in law and in fact in upholding the method adopted by Ld. AO/TP( for determining

Novartis India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 7(1), Mumbai

ITA 2308/MUM/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 37(1)Section 41(3)Section 80H

held correct as a result of the transfer of Plot no. GROUND NO. 7 The learned CIT(A) has with respect to the international transaction pertaining to export of Rifampacin to associated enterprises, erred in not adopting the 'class of transactions approach' and rejecting the arithmetic mean of the third ... party rates for sale of Rifampacin as Comparable Uncontrolled Price ('CUP') to determine the arm's length price of the said international transaction. Further, the learned CIT(A) while determining the arm's length price of the said international transaction has erred in using the CUP method by taking

ACIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai vs. Novartis India ( Formelry Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, (i) the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose (ii) the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and (iii) the Cross Objections filed by the assessee ...

ITA 2188/MUM/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal & Co 76/Mum/2013 (A.Y 2003-04) Novartis India Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income–Tax–14(1)(1) Inspire Bkc, 7Th Floor, Room No 432, Bandra Kurla Complex, Aaykar Bhawan, Bandra (E) M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. Aaach2914F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Deputy Commissioner Vs. Novartis India Limited Of Income–Tax–14(1)(1) Inspire Bkc, 7Th Floor, Room No 432, Bandra Kurla Complex, Aaykar Bhawan, Bandra (E) M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400020 Pan/Gir No. Aaach2914F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 37(1)Section 41(3)Section 80H

held correct as a result of the transfer of Plot no. GROUND NO. 7 The learned CIT(A) has with respect to the international transaction pertaining to export of Rifampacin to associated enterprises, erred in not adopting the 'class of transactions approach' and rejecting the arithmetic mean of the third ... party rates for sale of Rifampacin as Comparable Uncontrolled Price ('CUP') to determine the arm's length price of the said international transaction. Further, the learned CIT(A) while determining the arm's length price of the said international transaction has erred in using the CUP method by taking

Chiguruvada Dileep Kumar, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 143/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Respondent: Shri Ravi Shankar .S.V
Section 10Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 80CSection 80E

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