← All Phrases

“most appropriate method”

Transfer PricingSection 92CSection 92C1,345 judgments

The decision most relied on for most appropriate method is CIT v. Cushman & Wakefield (India) (P.) Ltd. (367 ITR 730), cited in 120 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on most appropriate method

CIT v. Cushman & Wakefield (India) (P.) Ltd.
367 ITR 730 · 2014 · High Court
120
citing judgments

This case determines the Arm's Length Price (ALP) for intra-group services and reimbursements, clarifying when charges constitute services warranting a mark-up versus mere pass-through costs. It provides guidance on the circumstances under which an ALP adjustment, including an ALP of 'nil', is appropriate for such transactions.

Dresser-Rand India (P.) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT
13 Taxmann.com 82 · 2011 · High Court
43
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot disregard an assessee's decision to avail services from associated enterprises, even if the assessee has internal expertise, as the determination of necessity is the assessee's prerogative. The Transfer Pricing Officer's role is to determine the arm's length price, not the need for the service itself.

CIT v. EHPT India P Ltd.
350 ITR 41 · 2013 · High Court
41
citing judgments

The headcount method is an appropriate allocation key for indirect expenses between eligible and non-eligible units when it has been consistently accepted by revenue authorities and there is no just cause for abandoning it. Deviation from a consistently followed and accepted method can disturb or distort profits.

Mobis India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
38 Taxmann.com 231 · 2013 · ITAT
38
citing judgments

A working capital adjustment is unreliable if it is based on broad approximations, estimations, and assumptions, and the assessee fails to demonstrate how the adjustment was arrived at.

LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT
29 Taxmann.com 300 · 2013 · High Court
37
citing judgments

The 'bright line test' is not an appropriate method for determining the existence of an international transaction for calculating arm's length price. This ruling overrules prior special bench decisions on AMP expenses.

Magneti Marelli Powertrain India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
389 ITR 469 · 2016 · High Court
35
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer (AO) or Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) cannot dispute the application of the TNMM method if they have already accepted it as the most appropriate method for certain international transactions, especially when other transactions are intrinsically linked.

Skoda Auto India (P) Ltd. v. ACIT, Aurangabad
30 SOT 319 · 2009 · ITAT
26
citing judgments

The Tribunal may allow adjustments for differences between the tested party and comparable companies to eliminate material differences, provided accurate and credible evidence is furnished.

Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-6 v. Matrix Cellular International Services (P.) Ltd.
90 Taxmann.com 54 · 2018 · High Court
25
citing judgments

The Resale Price Method (RPM) is the most appropriate method for determining the arm's length price of a distributor who does not add significant value to the goods purchased.

Judgments citing most appropriate method

Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT Circle-22(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 9482/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: S/Shri Himanshu S. Sinha & Bhuwan Dhoopar, AdvFor Respondent: S/Shri Mahesh Shah, CIT(DR) & Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

case and in law, the Ld. DRP/AO/TPO have erred in not appreciating that after application of Transactional Net Margin Method (“TNMM”) as the Most Appropriate Method (“MAM”) for benchmarking the international transactions, no separate arm’s length analysis was required in respect of the individual elements of cost (AMP expenditure ... international transaction is 13 Samsung India Electronics. established. If no international transaction is found to exist, the occasion to select the most appropriate method to determine the arm’s length price would not arise at all. 16. The finding of the Coordinate Benches in ten prior assessment years that

Goodyear India Ltd., Faridabad vs. DCIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 346/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Verma CIT (DR ) and Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 92B

Transfer pricing document, for bench marking the transaction of payment of trade mark fees, the assessee selected CUP Method as Most Appropriate Method (MAM). For applying CUP Method, the assessee selected 6 comparable license agreements which are at Arm’s Length Range from 3% to 3.33% with a median ... transaction of payment of royalty entered into by the assessee are to be considered being at arm’s length applying TNMM as the most appropriate method. 18. We therefore direct the assessing officer to delete the adjustment on this account.” This decision of the Tribunal has been followed

Goodyear India Ltd, Faridabad vs. ACIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1451/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Verma CIT (DR ) and Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 92B

Transfer pricing document, for bench marking the transaction of payment of trade mark fees, the assessee selected CUP Method as Most Appropriate Method (MAM). For applying CUP Method, the assessee selected 6 comparable license agreements which are at Arm’s Length Range from 3% to 3.33% with a median ... transaction of payment of royalty entered into by the assessee are to be considered being at arm’s length applying TNMM as the most appropriate method. 18. We therefore direct the assessing officer to delete the adjustment on this account.” This decision of the Tribunal has been followed

Tupperware India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, Special Range- 9, New Delhi

Accordingly, ground Nos. 10, 11 and 12 are allowed subject to the above directions

ITA 8135/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumartupperware India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Jcit, Spl. Range 9, 204 – 206, Tolstoy House, New Delhi. 15, Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Aaact3770D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Tiwari, Advocate Ms. Tanya, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Zafrul Haque Tanweer, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.07.2024 Date Of Order : 25.07.2024 Order Per Shamim Yahya: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Assessing Officer Dated 26.10.2018 Pursuant To The Directions Issued By The Ld. Drp For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Read As Under :-

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Zafrul Haque Tanweer, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C

parties and perused the material available on records. The Ld. TPO as well as the Hon’ble DRP has upheld CUP as the most appropriate method for benchmarking transactions with respect to payment of royalty. Since the application of CUP is not disputed either

Hospira Healthcare India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

ITA 469/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.469/Chny/2017 िनधा<रण वष< /Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Hospira Healthcare India The Dy. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income Tax, Sri-Nivas, New No.86 (Old No.89), Corporate Circle-2(2), Gn Chetty Road, T Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan: Aaabco 2190F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Sriram Seshadri, C.A Jkथ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Jagadish, A.M : Aforesaid Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Assessment Order Passed By The Dcit, Corporate Circle-2(2), Chennai U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012-13, In Pursuance Of The Directions Issued By The Dispute Resolution Panel, Bengalore (Hereinafter ‘Drp’) Vide Directions Dated 09.11.2016. :- 2 -:

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, C.A JKFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143(3)

asset. The Ld. Assessing Officer also made addition on TP adjustment on sale to AE by applying TNMM methods as against CUP as most appropriate methods . The Ld. A.O also further made adjustment for the rate of interest paid by the assessee on inter corporate convertible debentures (ICCD) issued ... credit for taxes deducted at source (“TDS”) amounting to INR 1,15,82,340. 4. Ground 4 – Erroneous rejection of CUP as the most appropriate method for sale of goods by Hospira India 4.1. That the Ld. TPO and Hon’ble DRP erred in failing to adopt a consistent

Jushi India Fiberglass Private Limited, Lower Parel, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 6(1)(2), Churchgate, Mumbai

In the results, in the comparability study after giving working capital

ITA 1163/MUM/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Chaitee Londhe, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Nihar Ranjan Samal, Sr. D/R
Section 143(3)Section 92B

consequently the learned AO erred in facts and in law in rejecting Transaction Net Margin Method ("TNMM") as most appropriate method for determination of ALP of the transaction of purchase of goods from AE. I.T.A. No. 1163/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Jushi India Fiberglass Private Limited ... consequently the learned AO erred in facts and in law in adopting Resale Price Method ("RPM") as most appropriate method for determination of ALP of the transaction of purchase of goods from AE. 4. Hon"ble DRP and consequently the learned AO erred in facts and in law in rejecting

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vijayawada vs. Fysolate Technologies, Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 182/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.182/Viz/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Fysolate Technologies, Income Tax, Vijayawada. Vijawayada. Pan: Aacff5633L (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri Mithilesh Sannareddy ""याथ" क" ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 15/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri Mithilesh SannareddyFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

care industry. The assessee has carried out economic analysis and has adopted CUP / TNMM (“Comparable Uncontrolled Price / Transactional Net Margin Method”) as the Most Appropriate Method. The assessee compared the prices of the product from 5 various quotations received from third parties under CUP Method. The assessee compared the average ... rejected the benchmarking analysis by the assessee. The Ld. TPO however did not dispute the TNM Method adopted by the assessee as the Most Appropriate Method. The Ld. TPO thereafter proceeded to determine the ALP by conducting an 7 independent search based on the assessee’s profile & functions, the assets

DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Elitecore Technologies Private Limited, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1728/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1728/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Dy.Cit Elitecore Technologies Pvt.Ltd. Circle-2(1)(1) बनाम/ (Now Merged With Sterlite Ahmedabad Technolgies Limited) V/S. 904, Silicon Tower, B/H. Pariseema Building Off. C.G. Road Ahmedabad, Gujarat-380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaace 6815G (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dhinal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue As Against The Order Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)-10, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”], Dated 04/09/2019, Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Dcit Vs. Elitecore Technologies Pvt.Ltd. Asst. Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 195Section 250Section 40Section 92C

invited our attention to the fact that the Ld.CIT(A) in his order has dealt with Rule 10B which states for adoption of most appropriate method and also applying of adjustment if the same could have material impact of the price under CUP method. He also stated that

Capitalg International Llc (Formerly Known As Gc Aisa L.L.C.), Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Int Tax Circle 2(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1632/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2024AY 2017-2018
Section 143(3)

same is hereby rejected 10.2.8. The submissions of assessee have been carefully considered. The assessee has benchmarked this transaction under Other Method as Most Appropriate Method. In support of MAM the assessee relied on the Valuation Report issued by an independent Valuer where in DCF method was considered to determine

Deutsche Equities India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl.C.I.T. RG. 4(1), Mumbai

ITA 8354/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2024AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Anil SantFor Respondent: Shri P.J. Pardiwala
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 92D

Rules, 1962 (on account of significant differences in the transactions entered by the Assessee with associated enterprises and top 10 FIIs), the most appropriate method (‘MAM’) should be regarded as Transactional Net Margin Method (‘TNMM’).” 2.3. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 8033/Mum/2011 ... benchmarking the International Transaction relating to CH Trades, the Assessee had adopted Comparable Uncontrolled Price Method [for short ‘CUP Method’] as the Most Appropriate Method. Even though the Assessee had undertaken CH Trades with non-AEs/third parties, the Assessee rejected the aforesaid transactions citing differences in the nature

DCIT 4(1), Mumbai vs. Deutsche Equities India P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 8033/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anil SantFor Respondent: Shri P.J. Pardiwala
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 92D

Rules, 1962 (on account of significant differences in the transactions entered by the Assessee with associated enterprises and top 10 FIIs), the most appropriate method (‘MAM’) should be regarded as Transactional Net Margin Method (‘TNMM’).” 2.3. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 8033/Mum/2011 ... benchmarking the International Transaction relating to CH Trades, the Assessee had adopted Comparable Uncontrolled Price Method [for short ‘CUP Method’] as the Most Appropriate Method. Even though the Assessee had undertaken CH Trades with non-AEs/third parties, the Assessee rejected the aforesaid transactions citing differences in the nature

Je Energy Ventures Private Limited, Noida vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1)(1), Gautam Budh Nagar

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

ITA 513/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 92B

model without any veracity. J E Energy Ventures Private Limited vs. DCIT 1.2.10 the Ld. TPO has grossly erred by not selecting the most appropriate method for benchmarking the subject international transaction; and 1.3 That the Ld. AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 270A

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed in part

ITA 74/AHD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri TR Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Parin Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 35

case was given out of own funds of the assessee. 4.5 There is no dispute to the fact that CUP method is the most appropriate method to ascertain ALP of the international transaction of interest received on loan. Where the transaction was of lending money in foreign currency

Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed in part

ITA 53/AHD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri TR Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Parin Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 35

case was given out of own funds of the assessee. 4.5 There is no dispute to the fact that CUP method is the most appropriate method to ascertain ALP of the international transaction of interest received on loan. Where the transaction was of lending money in foreign currency

Ge Subsidiary Inc, 63 (Successor in Interest of Monogram Licesing International Inc.), Mumbai vs. ACIT (It) RG. 3 (2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5906/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyalge Subsidiary Inc, 63 (Successor In Interest Of Monogram Licensing International Inc.) C/O. Pwc House, Plot No. 18 A, Guru Nanak Station Road, Bandra, Mumbai- 400050 Pan: Aadcm6233F Appellant Vs. Acit (Intl Taxation) - 3(2) (2), Mumbai, Room No. 1615, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400 021 Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri PratikFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Tharwal, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 92C(3)

year under consideration from its group entities in India. The Assessee had benchmarked the said international transactions by adopting CUP as the most appropriate method. During the course of the transfer pricing assessment proceedings, the TPO compared the amount reflected by the Assessee in the Form 3CEB with the amounts

Astrazeneca Pharma India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 284/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Sri Nikhil Tiwari, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)

purpose of determining excess AMP expenditure incurred by the Appellant; 25. without prejudice to the above, erred in considering ‘Other method’ as the Most Appropriate Method (“MAM”) and identified companies engaged in advertisement/ marketing support services as comparable to determine the ALP for comparability purpose; 26. Without prejudice ... also perform similar AMP functions, and if no such comparable company could be identified, then the AMP transaction has be analysed separately by adopting appropriate method. The plea that the acceptance of TNMM at entity Vavel would not warrant a separate analysis and adjustment on the AMP transaction, is liable

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

Accordingly. This ground is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2477/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: S/Shri Porus F.Kaka & Manish KanthFor Respondent: Ms.Dhivya Ruth J, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)

contract received through Associated Enterprises is also supported by onsite service facilities which the AEs provide. The TNMM has been considered as the most appropriate method and for the purpose of benchmarking the following comparables / methodology was used by the assessee:- Sr. Name of company Average NPI No. 1. Core

Tata Consultance Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Ltu-1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2413/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: S/Shri Porus F.Kaka & Manish KanthFor Respondent: Ms.Dhivya Ruth J, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)

contract received through Associated Enterprises is also supported by onsite service facilities which the AEs provide. The TNMM has been considered as the most appropriate method and for the purpose of benchmarking the following comparables / methodology was used by the assessee:- Sr. Name of company Average NPI No. 1. Core

M/S Centrient Pharmaceuticals India Private Limited, Nawanshahar vs. Additinal/Joint/Deputy/Asstt. C.It, ITO, Neac, Delhi

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

ITA 102/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Darpan Kirpalani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 144

records, it is noted that the assessee had benchmarked its aforesaid international transaction by applying Transactional Net Margin method as the most appropriate method which was rejected by the TPO wherein he applied CUP method to benchmark the said international transaction and determined the arm’s length price ... assessee has assailed Transfer Pricing Adjustment of Rs.8,05,24,450/- in respect of corporate services fees. The TPO applied CUP as the most appropriate method and determined ALP of the transaction as Nil. The TPO has further observed that no independent party would have made a similar payment

Oakton Global Technology Services Centre (India) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-16(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 309/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.309/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Oakton Global Technology Vs. Income Tax Officer Services Centre (India) (P) Ltd, Ward 16(3) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaaco8824H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Ravi Bhardwaj, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Th Vijaya Lakshmi, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/06/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12/06/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bhardwaj, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144(5)

including provision of software development services and reimbursement of expenses etc. The assessee has conducted TP study by adopting TNMM as the most appropriate method. The assessee has computed the OP/OC at 11.87% and claimed that the transactions with its AEs are at ALP. The TPO after considering the relevant