← 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

Franklin Wardcorpp India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addll./Jt/ACIT, NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 2487/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Rao &For Respondent: Ms. Vranda U. Matkari, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)

bottom loading tank truck fitting of ₹ 5,89,74,155/- from its Associated Enterprises. The assessee adopted Resale Price Method [ RPM] as the Most Appropriate Method. For benchmarking assessee submits that its Associated Enterprises has followed the practice of cost of purchase plus markup of 10% margin in all transactions ... margins were used by the assessee to demonstrate that international transaction is at Arm’s Length Price. Therefore, the resale price method as Most Appropriate method [MAM] is incorrect. According to the learned Transfer Pricing Officer, the assessee and the Associated Enterprises are operating in different economic circumstances and Associated

Franklin Wardcorpp India P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/DIT/Asstt/ITO, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 1279/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Rao &For Respondent: Ms. Vranda U. Matkari, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)

bottom loading tank truck fitting of ₹ 5,89,74,155/- from its Associated Enterprises. The assessee adopted Resale Price Method [ RPM] as the Most Appropriate Method. For benchmarking assessee submits that its Associated Enterprises has followed the practice of cost of purchase plus markup of 10% margin in all transactions ... margins were used by the assessee to demonstrate that international transaction is at Arm’s Length Price. Therefore, the resale price method as Most Appropriate method [MAM] is incorrect. According to the learned Transfer Pricing Officer, the assessee and the Associated Enterprises are operating in different economic circumstances and Associated

Sas Institute (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes with above directions

ITA 1567/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Dy. Commissioner Of Income- M/S Sas Institute (India) Private Tax, Circle 3(3) Limited Apeejay House, 3 Rd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. 3, Dinshaw Wachha Road, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecs3149K Assessee By : Shri M.P. Lohia, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Vranda U.Matkari, Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2023

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Lohia, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda U.Matkari, DR
Section 140Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

comparable uncontrolled price method (CUP) and using transactional net margin method (TNMM") for benchmarking royalty transaction Erred by not considering CUP as the most appropriate method adopted by the Appellant for benchmarking its international transaction pertaining to payment of royalty and inappropriately adopting TNMM as the most appropriate method ... assessee has entered into seven different international transactions. For purchase of manual and royalty payment, assessee adopted the CUP as the most appropriate method for benchmarking international transaction. For training fees and of other services assessee adopted Transactional Net Margin Method as most appropriate method. The learned Transfer Pricing Officer

M/S. Bhatia Global Trading Ltd., Indore vs. The DCIT 1(1), Indore

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 247/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanibhatia Global Trading Ltd. Dcit 1(1) Through Official Liquidator Indore Old Cia Building, 1St Floor Vs. Opp. G.P.O. Residency Area, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaacb6751 C Assessee By None Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 10.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26 .07.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14A

reported International transactions with associated Enterprises (AE). The details of the international transactions and benchmarking done by the assessee by adopting TNMM as most appropriate method are given at page no.2 & 3 of the DRP as under: Sr. Description of Amount Method P PLI PLI of Method adjustment No. international ... services provided by the AE of the assesse. 10. We are further noted that the assesse has though adopted the TNMM as most appropriate method in the TP analysis as first preference however, the assesse has also given an alternative secondary TP analysis by adopting Comparable Uncontrolled Price

Greaves Cotton Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal for assessment year 2012 –

ITA 6560/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji, Ms. Aastha &
Section 144CSection 35Section 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92F

imputed in case of the assessee. He submitted that following the decision of the coordinate bench is not any of the most appropriate method as prescribed under the transfer pricing provisions. He therefore submitted that the learned assessing officer and the learned dispute resolution panel has correctly held that ... year 2010 – 11. Mandate with the learned TPO and the learned DRP is to compute the arm’s-length price by adopting the most appropriate method under section 92CA (3) of the act and adopting one of the ITA Nos. 1745/MUM/2016, 2069 & 7166/MUM/2017, 6560/MUM2018 Graves Cotton

Greaves Cotton Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal for assessment year 2012 –

ITA 7166/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji, Ms. Aastha &
Section 144CSection 35Section 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92F

imputed in case of the assessee. He submitted that following the decision of the coordinate bench is not any of the most appropriate method as prescribed under the transfer pricing provisions. He therefore submitted that the learned assessing officer and the learned dispute resolution panel has correctly held that ... year 2010 – 11. Mandate with the learned TPO and the learned DRP is to compute the arm’s-length price by adopting the most appropriate method under section 92CA (3) of the act and adopting one of the ITA Nos. 1745/MUM/2016, 2069 & 7166/MUM/2017, 6560/MUM2018 Graves Cotton

Greaves Cotton Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal for assessment year 2012 –

ITA 2069/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji, Ms. Aastha &
Section 144CSection 35Section 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92F

imputed in case of the assessee. He submitted that following the decision of the coordinate bench is not any of the most appropriate method as prescribed under the transfer pricing provisions. He therefore submitted that the learned assessing officer and the learned dispute resolution panel has correctly held that ... year 2010 – 11. Mandate with the learned TPO and the learned DRP is to compute the arm’s-length price by adopting the most appropriate method under section 92CA (3) of the act and adopting one of the ITA Nos. 1745/MUM/2016, 2069 & 7166/MUM/2017, 6560/MUM2018 Graves Cotton

Greaves Cotton Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal for assessment year 2012 –

ITA 1745/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji, Ms. Aastha &
Section 144CSection 35Section 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92F

imputed in case of the assessee. He submitted that following the decision of the coordinate bench is not any of the most appropriate method as prescribed under the transfer pricing provisions. He therefore submitted that the learned assessing officer and the learned dispute resolution panel has correctly held that ... year 2010 – 11. Mandate with the learned TPO and the learned DRP is to compute the arm’s-length price by adopting the most appropriate method under section 92CA (3) of the act and adopting one of the ITA Nos. 1745/MUM/2016, 2069 & 7166/MUM/2017, 6560/MUM2018 Graves Cotton

Eos Power India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. JCIT (OSD) 8(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 862/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda U. Matkari, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 2(22)Section 92Section 92C

Associated Enterprises as that of a distributor. He further held that in the present circumstance the application of Comparable Uncontrolled Price as the most appropriate method is justified. He further noted that ITA Nos. 862 & 6881/Mum/2013 EOS Power India P. Ltd.; A.Y. 08-09 & 09-10 assessee has disallowed ... development, marketing support finance support and IT support services, which is benchmarked by the assessee following the Transactional Net Margin Method as the most appropriate method. The learned Transfer Pricing Officer has examined the above international transaction. The assessee has made the above payment to its enterprises M/s Red Rocket

Eos Power India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 8(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6881/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda U. Matkari, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 2(22)Section 92Section 92C

Associated Enterprises as that of a distributor. He further held that in the present circumstance the application of Comparable Uncontrolled Price as the most appropriate method is justified. He further noted that ITA Nos. 862 & 6881/Mum/2013 EOS Power India P. Ltd.; A.Y. 08-09 & 09-10 assessee has disallowed ... development, marketing support finance support and IT support services, which is benchmarked by the assessee following the Transactional Net Margin Method as the most appropriate method. The learned Transfer Pricing Officer has examined the above international transaction. The assessee has made the above payment to its enterprises M/s Red Rocket

Relaxo Footwear Ltd., Delhi vs. Assessing Officer, National E- Assesment Centre, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 590/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: FixedITAT Delhi20 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2016-17 Relaxo Footwear Ltd., Vs Assessing Officer, Plot No.10, Aggarwal City Square, National E-Assessment Centre, Manglam Place Sec.3, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 085. Pan: Aaacr0259D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Ca Revenue By : Shri R.D. Burman, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.07.2023 Order Per M. Balaganesh, Am: This Appeal In Ita No.590/Del/2021 For Ay 2016-17 Arises Out Of The Order Of The National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Ao’) Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C & 144C(13) R.W.Ss 143(3A) & 143(3B) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 30.03.2021. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Several Grounds Before Us, The Only Effective Issue To Be Decided In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Ld. Ao Was Justified In Making Transfer Pricing Adjustment Of Rs.91,04,673/- Pursuant To The Directions Of The Ld. Drp In Respect Of The Specified Domestic Transactions.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.D. Burman, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 3Section 80I

paper book filed before us. 5. The ld. TPO rejected the Cost Plus method adopted by the assessee as the Most Appropriate Method (MAM) and substituted the same with Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM). The ld. TPO identified six comparables by adopting the Profit Level Indicator (PLI) as Operating Profit/Operating ... comparables taken by the ld. TPO and arrived at the revised margin of the comparables at 13.09%; upheld the TNMM to be Most Appropriate Method and directed to recompute the deduction u/s 80IC at 30%. Subsequently, pursuant to the directions of ld. DRP, the ld. TPO passed an order dated

Sona Blw Precision Forgings Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range-8, New Delhi

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

ITA 525/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Aditi Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 92C

loans availed. However, we are of the opinion that, the transaction has to be benchmarked applying most appropriate method as per the provisions of the Act. The adjustment made by the Assessing Officer taking average rate of guarantee commission by the banks cannot be held as a comparable uncontrolled price

Accenture Solutions P Ltd (Asol), Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/ Dy/CIT/Asstt/ITO, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi & the Dy CIT, Circle-14(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1255/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhaccenture Solutions Vs. Additional/Joint/Deputy/ Private Limited (‘Asol’) Assistant Commissioner Plant 3, Godrej & Boyce Of Income Tax/Income- Complex, Phirojshah Tax Officer, National Nagar, Vikhroli West, Facelless Assessment Off L.B.S Marg, Centre, Delhi Mumbai – 400079 The Dcit, Circle 14(1)(1) स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaach3235M Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Nishant Thakkar/ Hiten Chande/ Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala Respondent By : Azhar Zain Vayal Parambath Date Of Hearing 22.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 13.07.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ao (National Assessment Centre) Mumbai- 2, Dated 18.03.2021 For A.Y. 2016-17 As Per The Direction Of The Drp Issued U/S 144C (5) Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Ao Transfer Pricing Officer (Tpo), Based On The Directions Of The Hon'Ble Drp Has: General Ground 1. Erred In Assessing The Total Income Of The Appellant At Rs.2888,33,73,016 Against A Total Income Of Rs.2179,39,30,620 As Reported By The Appellant In Its Revised Return Of Income & Determining A Demand Of Rs.2186,98,55,847 Payable By The Appellant.

For Appellant: Nishant Thakkar/ Hiten Chande/For Respondent: Azhar Zain Vayal Parambath
Section 144CSection 92CSection 92C(3)

Licensing of trademark and brand' with an average royalty rate of 5%. 22. Without prejudice to the contention that CUP method is the most appropriate method for benchmarking the royalty transaction, erred in rejecting the alternate analysis using TNMM that was submitted by the Appellant for benchmarking the royalty transaction

Gruner India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 10(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4062/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 4062/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 M/S Gruner India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 15 Dsidc, Okhla Industrial Area, Circle-10(2), Phase-Ii, Scheme-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcg2938H Assessee By : Sh. Pancham Sethi, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Mrinal Kumar Das, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.07.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated Xx.02.2019 Passed By The Ao U/S 254/143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee:

For Appellant: Sh. Pancham Sethi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Mrinal Kumar Das, Sr. DR
Section 234BSection 254Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C

Communication India (P.) Ltd. (supra) and clarified in Magneti Marelli Powertrain India (P) Ltd (supra) above. 11. As far as the issue of most appropriate method is concerned, this Court is of the opinion that no definitive ruling ought to be given at this stage. As to whether ... determination of the issue of aggregation/de-segregation itself. In other words, that whether in the event of de-segregation, which would be the appropriate method, should be left to the TPO to decide, after bearing counsel for the parties. However, we clarify that in the event it is held that aggregation

Lubrizol India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 586/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1464/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-3(4) बिधम/ Plant 9/3, Thane-Belapur Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Road, Turbhe, Navi Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai-400705. Mumbai-400020. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.586/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ National Faceless Plant 9/3, Thane-Belapur Assessment Centre, Delhi. Vs. Road, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai-400705. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1576/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2018-19) Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit/Acit, Circle-3(4) बिधम/ Plant 9/3, Thane-Belapur Mumbai. Vs. Road, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai-400705. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacl0126H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Niraj Sheth/Ms. Urvi Mehta/Abdulkadir Jawadwala Revenue By: Shri Aditya M Rai (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/06/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/06/2023

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth/Ms. UrviFor Respondent: Shri Aditya M Rai (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 92C(1)

application of Transactional Net Margin 3 586 & 1576/Mum/2022 A.Y. 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. Method (TNMM) as the Most Appropriate Method (MAM) as adopted by the assessee for benchmarking the International Transaction in respect of its Export of Chemical Additives to its Associated Enterprises ... circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. TPO/DRP/AO erred in rejecting the application of Transactional Net Margin Method (“TNMM”) as the Most Appropriate Method (“MAM”) used by the appellant for benchmarking the International transaction in respect of its exports of chemical additives to its Associated Enterprise

M/S. Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1464/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1464/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-3(4) बिधम/ Plant 9/3, Thane-Belapur Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Road, Turbhe, Navi Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai-400705. Mumbai-400020. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.586/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ National Faceless Plant 9/3, Thane-Belapur Assessment Centre, Delhi. Vs. Road, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai-400705. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1576/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2018-19) Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit/Acit, Circle-3(4) बिधम/ Plant 9/3, Thane-Belapur Mumbai. Vs. Road, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai-400705. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacl0126H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Niraj Sheth/Ms. Urvi Mehta/Abdulkadir Jawadwala Revenue By: Shri Aditya M Rai (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/06/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/06/2023

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth/Ms. UrviFor Respondent: Shri Aditya M Rai (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 92C(1)

application of Transactional Net Margin 3 586 & 1576/Mum/2022 A.Y. 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. Method (TNMM) as the Most Appropriate Method (MAM) as adopted by the assessee for benchmarking the International Transaction in respect of its Export of Chemical Additives to its Associated Enterprises ... circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. TPO/DRP/AO erred in rejecting the application of Transactional Net Margin Method (“TNMM”) as the Most Appropriate Method (“MAM”) used by the appellant for benchmarking the International transaction in respect of its exports of chemical additives to its Associated Enterprise

DCIT Cir. 4(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Morgan Stanley India Co. Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and ground of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2720/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2008-09
Section 32(1)Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 92Section 92CSection 92C(2)

International Inc. One of the controversies was that, assessee in the Transfer Pricing Study Report had adopted TNMM at entity level as the Most Appropriate Method for determining ALP for the said transactions with AE and reported that same were at arm‟s length. However, the ld. TPO rejected TNMM ... form of share broking transaction carried out on behalf of other entities like FIIs and therefore, according to him CUP is the Most Appropriate Method. The assessee had submitted that if CUP is to be applied, then certain adjustments should be allowed on account of marketing, research costs and volume

Morgan Stanley India Company P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and ground of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1714/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2008-09
Section 32(1)Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 92Section 92CSection 92C(2)

International Inc. One of the controversies was that, assessee in the Transfer Pricing Study Report had adopted TNMM at entity level as the Most Appropriate Method for determining ALP for the said transactions with AE and reported that same were at arm‟s length. However, the ld. TPO rejected TNMM ... form of share broking transaction carried out on behalf of other entities like FIIs and therefore, according to him CUP is the Most Appropriate Method. The assessee had submitted that if CUP is to be applied, then certain adjustments should be allowed on account of marketing, research costs and volume

DCIT 4(3), Mumbai vs. Jm Morgan Stanley Securities P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and ground of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2637/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2003-04
Section 32(1)Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 92Section 92CSection 92C(2)

International Inc. One of the controversies was that, assessee in the Transfer Pricing Study Report had adopted TNMM at entity level as the Most Appropriate Method for determining ALP for the said transactions with AE and reported that same were at arm‟s length. However, the ld. TPO rejected TNMM ... form of share broking transaction carried out on behalf of other entities like FIIs and therefore, according to him CUP is the Most Appropriate Method. The assessee had submitted that if CUP is to be applied, then certain adjustments should be allowed on account of marketing, research costs and volume

Morgan Stanley India Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and ground of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1952/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2003-04
Section 32(1)Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 92Section 92CSection 92C(2)

International Inc. One of the controversies was that, assessee in the Transfer Pricing Study Report had adopted TNMM at entity level as the Most Appropriate Method for determining ALP for the said transactions with AE and reported that same were at arm‟s length. However, the ld. TPO rejected TNMM ... form of share broking transaction carried out on behalf of other entities like FIIs and therefore, according to him CUP is the Most Appropriate Method. The assessee had submitted that if CUP is to be applied, then certain adjustments should be allowed on account of marketing, research costs and volume