“most appropriate method”

Paramount Shipping and Management P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Marine Limited Partnership) Bernhard Schuite Shipmanagement 1,37,841 (IOM) Limited (formerly known as Dorchester Limited) The assessee adopted TNM method as the “most appropriate method” and OP/OC as “Profit level indicator”(PLI). The assessee has shown net profit (PLI) of 5%. The TPO noticed that the assessee has prepared ... which reads as under:- 5 Paramount Shipping and Management Pvt. Ltd. “Provided that where more than one price is determined by the most appropriate method, the arm’s length price shall be taken to be the arithmetical mean of such prices.” The margin computed for each of the comparable companies

Sabre Travel Network (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 8(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalvk-Vk-La- 7380@Eaqcbz@2018 ¼Fu-Oa- 2014&15½ Sabre Travel Network (India) Pvt. Ltd. Urmi Estate, 14Th Floor, 96, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (West) Mumbai-400 013 ..... Vihykfkhz/Appellant Pan No. Aaaca4836H Cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Cc-8 (1) (2), Room No.625, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, ..... Izfroknh/Respondent Mumbai-400 020

international transactions with its Associated Enterprise (AE) with respect to provision for marketing services. The assessee applied Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) as most appropriate method to benchmark the transactions. The assessee selected six comparables to benchmark the transaction. The Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) vide order dated 11.12.2017 rejected

Strides Arcolab Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 15(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

that the DRP has proceed to compute the value of shares by applying a DCF method by stating that the DCF is the most appropriate method. In our considered view, the valuation method adopted by the assessee cannot be rejected without scrutinizing the valuation done by the assessee though

Sulzer Pumps India P. Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. Addl./Jt/Dy/ Asstt/ ITO, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Sulzer Pumps India Pvt Ltd V. Addl./Joint/Dy./Acit/Ito Plot No. 9, Midc, Digha National E-Assessment Centre Delhi Thane-Belapur Road, Navi Mumbai- 400708 Pan: Aaack2238F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Sulzer Pumps India Pvt Ltd V. National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi Plot No. 9, Midc, Digha Thane-Belapur Road Navi Mumbai- 400708 Pan: Aaack2238F (Appellant) (Respondent)

demonstrate that the price charged in an international transaction complies with the ALP and the method followed to ascertain the price is the most appropriate method. The assessee discharges this onus by maintaining the documentation; thereafter, the onus shifts to the tax authorities. In the event, the tax authorities disagree ... Only some qualitative ratios of decision may have persuasive value. 042. Further in this year assessee itself has benchmarked these transactions adopting different Most Appropriate methods. It is not the case that assessee has aggregated these transactions for benchmarking. 043. The Ld TPO and Ld DRP has also approached

Towers Watson India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhwillis Towers Watson Vs. The Dcit Central India Private Limited Circle – 8(3), Room No. 204, (F Orm Erly K Nown As T Ower S Wat S On I Nd Ia Pv T.L Td. ) Aaykar Bhavan 2 Floor, Tower B, Unitech Mumbai – 400 093 Business Park, South City-1, Sector 4, Gurgaon -122001 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacg2955K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Nikhil Tiwari Respondent By : Manoj Kumar Date Of Hearing 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-58, Mumbai Dated 25.03.2015 For A.Y. 2009-10. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “General Ground 1. Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax 8(3), Mumbai ('Learned Ao) In Determining The Total Taxable Income Of The Appellant For The Subject Ay At Rs.7,04,44,370 Instead Of The Amount Of Rs.1,14,98,477 As Reported Under Section 115Jb Of The Act, In The Return Of Income Filed By The Appellant. 2. Erred In Accepting The Contentions Of The Learned Ao Of Making A Reference Of The Appellant'S Case To The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax Ii(8), Mumbai (Learned Tpo) Under Section 92Ca(1) Of The Act, Without Satisfying The Conditions Specified Therein

benchmarking analysis undertaken by the Appellant for the provision of consultancy services, Rejection of the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method as the most appropriate method 5. erred in accepting the learned TPO's contention of rejecting the CUP method applied by the Appellant as the most appropriate method, without giving ... reasons, for benchmarking the international transactions with AEs of provision of consultancy services, Application of the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM') as the most appropriate method 6. erred in upholding the learned TPO's action of applying TNMM as the most appropriate method for benchmarking the international transactions pertaining

Fusion Jewellery Mfg. Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 9, Mumbai

Crores. The TPO accepted Transaction Net Margin Method (TNMM) followed by the Appellant for benchmarking the export to its AEs as the most appropriate method with Operating Profit(OP)/Operating Cost(OC) as Profit Level Indicator (PLI). However, the TPO, after taking into consideration the OP/OC margins of the twelve

ACIT Cir 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Canvas M Technologies Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Canvas M Technologies Ltd. Acit Cir 2(3)(1) (Now Known As M/S. Tech Room No. 552, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Mahindra Ltd.) Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Gateway Building, Apollo Mumbai-400 020 Bunder, Mumbai – 400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc8665N Assessee By : Mr. Viral Shah, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Samruddhi Hande, Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.05.2023

aggregated them for its transfer pricing study under Rule 10D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, assessee selected itself as the tested party, most appropriate method of Transactional Net Margin Method [ TNMM] adopting the Profit Level Indicator (PLI) of net cost plus markup. The margin of the assessee ... purpose of the above independent transaction of ₹22.67 crores, the most Canvas M Technologies Ltd(Now known as Tech Mahindra Ltd);A.Y. 2011-12 appropriate method is Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) and aggregation of the services is not acceptable. On verification of details, he held that assessee did not derive

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax -6(1)(2), Mumbai-400020 vs. M/S. Bristol Myers Squibb India P Ltd., Mumbai-400018

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and the assessee’s cross objections are dismissed

Bench: Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

assessee is carrying out significant advertising and brand promotion expenses. The TPO, for this reason adopted transaction net margin method (TNMM) as the most appropriate method and accordingly arrived at the TP addition. The assessee preferred appeal against the order of assessment. The CIT(A) allowed the appeal in favour ... issue arising out of this appeal is that in assessee’s case, for the trading segment, whether RPM is the most appropriate method. During the year under consideration, the assessee has purchased formulations worth Rs.93,34,84,656/- from its AE. The assessee selected RPM as the most appropriate method

Jsw Steels Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 8(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

during the financial year 2011-12 and all these loans were guaranteed by the assessee. 6. The assessee selected „Other Method‟ as the most appropriate method for benchmarking this international transaction of guarantee fee payable by the associated enterprises to the assessee. Under the „Other Method‟ applied by the assessee ... proceeded to benchmark the corporate guarantee by considering the rates for financial guarantee charged by the banks considering CUP as the most appropriate method. Since the guarantee fee rates charged by banks to Indian companies vary from 1.10% to 3% depending upon various M/s. JSW Steel Ltd. ITA no.2116/Mum./2017

L'Oreal India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm L’Oreal India Private Limited Asst. Cit, Circle-7(1)(1) A-Wing, 8Th Floor, Marathon Futurex, Mumbai-400 020 N.M.Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Vs. Mumbai-400 013

advertisements to enable higher sales of the products in the Indian market and not brand advertisements for or on behalf of the AE. Most appropriate method 15. Without prejudice to the above, erred in applying BLT and treating the same as routine ALP determination method under "Other Method" to determine ... order has not examined whether or not the method adopted by the appellant to determine the Arm’s length price (ALP) is the most appropriate method and has instead concluded that the payments for trademark and technical know-how royalty are excessive in nature (page 176 of appeal memo

Micro Focus Software Inc. (Earlier Known As Novell Inc.), Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT (Intl. Taxation)-Circle-3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

service PE under Article 5(2)(1). On the second question the AAR ruled that the transactional net margin method (TNMM) was the most appropriate method for the determination of the Arm's Length Price (ALP) in respect of the service agreement dated 14-4-2005 and it meets

Micro Focus Software Inc. (Earlier Known As Novell Inc.), Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT (Intl. Taxation)-Circle-3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

service PE under Article 5(2)(1). On the second question the AAR ruled that the transactional net margin method (TNMM) was the most appropriate method for the determination of the Arm's Length Price (ALP) in respect of the service agreement dated 14-4-2005 and it meets

Kongsberg Maritime Cm India Pvt. Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. Addll/Jt/Dy/ACIT/ITO-NFAC, Delhi

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2017-18

prescribed methods. In the facts of the present case, though, the Transfer Pricing Officer has mentioned that CUP is the most appropriate method, however, it is very much clear that he has neither applied CUP method as per letter and spirit of rule 10B(1)(a) nor has followed

Ingredion India Private Limited, Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-15(1)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

purpose of benchmarking the international transaction of payment of regional service fees; f. rejecting Transactional Net Margin Method ('TNMM') as the Most Appropriate Method ("MAM') for the determination of the ALP; and g. not appropriately applying any of the prescribed methods as per Section 92C(1) of the Act. Ingredion ... this angle. 011. ...... 012. The assessee benchmarked all these above three transactions on an aggregate basis using transactional net margin method as the most appropriate method. The claim of the assessee is that net operating margin of the assessee is higher than the comparable companies and therefore

Lord India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result we allow the additional ground raised by the assessee and quash the assessment order

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhaillord India Private Vs. Assistant Commissioner Limited (F Ormer Ly Know N A S L Ord Of Income-Tax, Circle- India C Hem Ica L Pr Od Uct S Pv T. Lt D. ) 10(2)(1), Room No. 509, A/401-404, 215 – Atrium Aayakar Bhavan, Chakala, Andheri – Kurla M.K. Road, Road Andheri (East) Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400093 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacu0785H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : M.P. Lohia Respondent By : Dr. Samual Pitta Date Of Hearing 29.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Drp-1, Mumbai Dated 26.02.2015 For A.Y. 2011- 12. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. Transfer Pricing - Availing Of Intra-Group Services 1.1 On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Acit/ Drp Erred In Determining The Arm'S Length Price In Relation To The International Transaction Relating To The Availing Of Group Benefit Services/ Technical Service Management Services (Hereinafter Referred To As "Intra-Group Services") Of Rs.1,14,87,092 To Be Rs. 22,97,418/-, Thus Making An Adjustment Of Rs.91,89,674/- & Thereby Disregarding The Fact That The Appellant Had Received The Services For The Purposes Of Its Business. In Doing So, The Learned Acit/ Drp Grossly Erred By Not Appreciating The Commercial Wisdom/ Expediency Of The Appellant

transfer pricing study report assessee used Internal Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) as the most appropriate method. Assessee selected return on total cost i.e. OP/OC as the profit level indicator, it computed its PLI on transactions with associated parties at 22.41%. It also bifurcated transactions with unrelated parties and stated ... adopted internal P a g e | 9 Lord India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle 10(2)(1) transactional net margin method as the most appropriate method. He found that revenue from engineering design services from associated enterprise segment is 57% whereas from non- AE segment is 43%. He accepted