← All Phrases

“CUP method”

Transfer PricingSection 92CSection 92C828 judgments

The decision most relied on for CUP method is Serdia Pharmaceuticals (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (44 SOT 391), cited in 39 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on CUP method

Serdia Pharmaceuticals (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT
44 SOT 391 · 2011 · ITAT
39
citing judgments

The Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method is preferred over indirect methods for determining the arm's length price in transfer pricing matters, especially for royalty payments.

Asstt. CIT v. MSS India (P.) Ltd.
32 SOT 132 · 2009 · ITAT
26
citing judgments

The Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method is preferred when comparable transactions with third parties are available to determine if transfer prices are at arm's length. Transactional profit methods are considered methods of last resort.

10 Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Addl. CIT
43 Taxmann.com 191 · 2014 · Reported
26
citing judgments

Bank guarantee commission prices are not comparable to external CUPs for benchmarking corporate guarantees in transfer pricing.

CIT v. Eicher Motors Ltd.
293 ITR 464 · 2007 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Expenditure by way of royalty is an allowable revenue deduction if it is for a limited license to use know-how, where the assessee is not vested with proprietary rights. This is especially true if the payment falls within a reasonable range based on comparable transactions.

CIT v. Star Paper Mills Ltd.
172 Taxmann.com 391 · 2025 · High Court
21
citing judgments

The transfer price for intra-group services, specifically the sale of power from a captive power plant to a manufacturing unit, can be benchmarked based on the price at which the manufacturing unit procures power from the State Electricity Board, especially when it reflects a reasonable and arm's length price.

ACIT v. MSS India (P) Ltd.
123 TTJ 657 · 2009 · ITAT
16
citing judgments

A transfer pricing officer (TPO) must justify preferring one method over another, such as the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) over the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method, by demonstrating fallacies in the application of the preferred standard method.

Star India P. Ltd. v. ACIT
317 ITR 292 · 2009 · ITAT
16
citing judgments

When analyzing international transactions, separate classes of transactions, such as fees for technical know-how, use of trademarks, and procurement, must be analyzed individually, as each impacts profits. Aggregation of such transactions is not permissible.

Gharda Chemicals Ltd. v. Oy. CIT
39 SOT 93 · 2010 · ITAT
16
citing judgments

The Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method is the most preferred method for determining arm's length price in international transactions, but it requires a high degree of comparability. If comparables are not identical, the CUP method may not be applicable unless another method is proven to be more reliable in the specific fact situation.

Judgments citing CUP method

Axis Bank Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 365/AHD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Axis Bank Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Opp. Income-Tax, Samartheshwar Temple, Nr. Law Circle 1(1)(1), Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380006 Pan : Aaacu 2414 K अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2023/03.04.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 10.04.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee-Appellant Has Challenged Correctness Of The Order Dated 28Th July, 2022 Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act” For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. 2. Ground No.1 Raised By The Assessee Reads As Under:- “1. Disallowance In Respect Of Annual Technical Fees (Tax Effect - Rs. 16,84,276) 1.1 The Learned Drp Has Erred In Upholding Addition Made By Ao In Respect Of Treating Annual Technical Services (Ats) Fees Paid To Infosys Limited To The Extent Of Rs. 48.66 Lacs As Prior Period Expense. 1.2. It Is Submitted That The Expenditure Relates To Amount Payable To Infosys & No Part Of The Amount Was Claimed As Expenditure At Any Time In The 2 Axis Bank Limited Vs. Acit Ay : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C

consequently the grounds of appeal raised by revenue are dismissed.” • Indian Hotels Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2019] 112 taxmann.com 340 (Mumbai - Trib.) TRANSFER PRICING: CUP method is most appropriate method to determine arm's length rate of interest of international transaction involving lending of money by assessee in foreign currency

Crm Services India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed with consequential effect

ITA 1519/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 254

call center services to be at arm’s length price applying TNMM as demonstrated above. The ld. TPO, however, applied 3 ITAs No.1518 & 1519/Del/2022 CUP method for benchmarking the transaction of payment of royalty and held that since no recognizable benefit has been received by the appellant from such payment

Crm Services India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed with consequential effect

ITA 1518/DEL/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 254

call center services to be at arm’s length price applying TNMM as demonstrated above. The ld. TPO, however, applied 3 ITAs No.1518 & 1519/Del/2022 CUP method for benchmarking the transaction of payment of royalty and held that since no recognizable benefit has been received by the appellant from such payment

Thermax Babcock & Wilcox Energy Solution Limited, Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/CIT/Asstt/ITO/NFAC, Delhi

ITA 739/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountαντ Μεμβer

For Appellant: Dhanesh Bafna a/wFor Respondent: Anil Sant

transactions and they have submitted the transfer pricing study report and have to bench mark the same. While doing so, they have adopted the CUP method by considering the earlier agreement with the B&W group as comparable with the present agreement with the assessee. This method of adoption ... earlier agreement under CUP method was rejected by the authorities below and treated the ALP as nil. After considering the submissions and treatment by the tax authorities below, we are of the opinion that both the proposed methods are not proper for the reason that there is requirement for transfer

Dy.CIT. CC.5(2) Cent. RG. -5, Mumbai vs. M/S. Usv Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 2574/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2574/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2356/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit-Cc-5(2) बिधम/ M/S. Usv Pvt. Ltd. Central Range-5, Room Arvind Vithal Gandhi Vs. No.1908, Air India Building, Chowk, Govandi, Nariman Point, Mumbai- Mumbai-400088. 400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacu1366N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Paras Savla Shri Pratik Poddar Revenue By: Smt Mahita Nair (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/04/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [Hereinafter “Ld. Cit(A)], Mumbai Dated 31.08.2020 & Order Dated 10.03.2021 For The Assessment Year 2012-13 & Ay. 2013-14 Respectively. Since Issues In Both The Years Were The Same, Both These Appeals Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Agreed That There Is No Change Of Facts Or Position In Law Across Both These Years & Therefore Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. We Accordingly Dispose Both The Appeals By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Paras SavlaFor Respondent: Smt Mahita Nair (Sr. DR)
Section 115JSection 92C

noted to have rejected the TPSR furnished by the assessee and held that the MAM was the Internal CUP method as the assessee had sold only one product to its AE, i.e., Metformin Tablet. The TPO accordingly compared the price of sales made ... most appropriate method. In the instant case, we find that the TPO has straight proceeded to apply CUP method. The TPO has not examined the applicability and relevance of TNMM. 23.1 At this juncture, it would be relevant to discuss the TNMM, it is also necessary to refer to Rule

Dy.CIT C C 5(2) Central RG-5, Mumbai vs. M/S. Usv Private Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 2356/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2574/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2356/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit-Cc-5(2) बिधम/ M/S. Usv Pvt. Ltd. Central Range-5, Room Arvind Vithal Gandhi Vs. No.1908, Air India Building, Chowk, Govandi, Nariman Point, Mumbai- Mumbai-400088. 400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacu1366N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Paras Savla Shri Pratik Poddar Revenue By: Smt Mahita Nair (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/04/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [Hereinafter “Ld. Cit(A)], Mumbai Dated 31.08.2020 & Order Dated 10.03.2021 For The Assessment Year 2012-13 & Ay. 2013-14 Respectively. Since Issues In Both The Years Were The Same, Both These Appeals Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Agreed That There Is No Change Of Facts Or Position In Law Across Both These Years & Therefore Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. We Accordingly Dispose Both The Appeals By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Paras SavlaFor Respondent: Smt Mahita Nair (Sr. DR)
Section 115JSection 92C

noted to have rejected the TPSR furnished by the assessee and held that the MAM was the Internal CUP method as the assessee had sold only one product to its AE, i.e., Metformin Tablet. The TPO accordingly compared the price of sales made ... most appropriate method. In the instant case, we find that the TPO has straight proceeded to apply CUP method. The TPO has not examined the applicability and relevance of TNMM. 23.1 At this juncture, it would be relevant to discuss the TNMM, it is also necessary to refer to Rule

Wsp Consultants India Private Limited, Uttar Pradesh vs. Pr, CIT, Delhi-7, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 867/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2011-12 Wsp Consultants India Private Ltd., Vs Pr. Cit, Fc-24, Film City Noida, Delhi-7, Sector 16A, Gautam Budh Nagar, New Delhi. Uttar Pradesh – 201301. Pan: Aaacw5220F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Himanshu S. Sinha, Shri Bhuwan Dhoopar & Shri Parash Biswal, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.03.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu S. SinhaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 254Section 263Section 92C

under:- “18. Perusal of the above order clarifies that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal remitted the issue regarding application of the method whether the CUP method or TNMM as a most appropriate method to the file of Assessing Officer to see whether the AE derived any benefit or mark ... Income Tax Act. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, in clear terms, directed the Assessing Officer to decide regarding the application of method i.e., whether CUP method or TNMM as a most appropriate method. Thus, a specific issue was directed to be decided by the Assessing Officer and a direction

Motherson Sumi Systems Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2054/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 108(4)Section 10BSection 10B(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234BSection 271(1)(e)Section 92D

also by applying the prime lending rate ('PLR) of State Bank of India ('SBI), thereby resulting in an erroneous application of Comparable Uncontrolled Price ('CUP")method; 3.4. disregarding the fact that the international transaction of interest received on loan has been accepted to be at an arm's length ... transactions; 3.5. completely disregarding the detailed and proper comparability analysis of the interest received on loans as submitted by the Appellant under CUP method on the basis of the comparable third party loan agreements and instead determined the arm's length interest rate on the basis of the PLR applicable

Torrecid India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax-11(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, ground no.4 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed and ground nos

ITA 1575/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am The Dy. Commissioner Of Torrecid India Private Limited Income Tax- 11(3)(1) Flat No.29, 30,31, Gidc Savli, Aaykar Bhavan, Alindra, Vadodra-Gujarat Vs. Gandhinagar, Gujarat-391775 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadct4321M Assessee By : Shri Jitendra Singh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vivek Anand Perampurana, Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Anand Perampurana
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144(3)Section 250

case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding/confirming the action of the Id. TPO in unjust/erroneous rejection of Comparable Uncontrolled Price ("CUP") Method as the most appropriate method for purchase of raw materials and finished goods and adopting Transactional Net Margin Method ("TNMM") for the purpose ... circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) further erred in rejecting the details submitted in support of CUP method by placing reliance on the observations made by the Ld. TΡΟ. 3. Rejection of Foreign Associated Enterprise as the Tested party  On the facts

Servier India Private Limited (Formerly Known As Serdia Pharmaceuticals (I) P. Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6567/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआअसं.6567/मुं/2011 (िन.व. 2005-06) Servier India Private Limited [Formerly Known As Serdia Pharmaceuticals (India) Pvt.Ltd.] 1703, 17Th Floor, B Wing, Parinee Crescenzo, Plot Nos C-38/39, “G” Block, Behind Mca, Bkc, Bandra (E), Mumbai 400 051 Pan: Aaacs-6696-R ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-7(2), Mumbai, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ....."ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/Appellant By : Shri Mukesh Bhutani, Advocate With S/Shri Paras Savla & Pratik Poddar Advocates "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : S/Shri Manoj Kumar, Cit-Dr & Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. A.R , सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 15/12/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 11/03/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Bhutani, Advocate with S/Shri Paras Savla & Pratik Poddar AdvocatesFor Respondent: S/Shri Manoj Kumar, CIT-DR and Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. A.R
Section 133(6)

Assessment Year 2002-03, the assessee had applied TNMM to benchmark the transaction with its overseas AE, the TPO applied CUP, the Tribunal upheld CUP method as most 9 appropriate method for determining ALP. However, the Tribunal while coming to the said conclusion remarked that no License Agreement was placed

Bank of Nova Scotia, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (It)-1(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 863/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.4981/मुं/2017 (िन.व.2010-11) आअसं.3065/मुं/2018 (िन.व.2011-12) आअसं.820/मुं/2019(िन.व.2012-13) आअसं.863/मुं/2022 (िन.व.2013-14) The Bank Of Nova Scotia, Mittal Towers, B-Wing, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 020. Pan: Aaacb-1536-H ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Additional Director Of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3,/Dcit (It) 1(2)(1)Mumbai Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ....."ितवादी/Respondent आअसं.4899/मुं/2017 (िन.व. 2010-11) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax,(It)-1(2),Mumbai Room No.1811, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. The Bank Of Nova Scotia, Mittal Towers, B-Wing, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 020. Pan: Aaacb-1536-H ....."ितवादी/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Anil Sant, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar and Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Sr. AR

following the TNMM and comparability analysis showed an arithmetic mean margin (operating profit to operating cost) of 15.28%. However, the TPO has applied internal CUP method and computed an upward adjustment of Rs.40,58,558/-. In the TP study report the assessee has given the analysis of the aforesaid transactions ... issuing guarantees on behalf of its associated enterprises and rejected TNMM adopted by the assessee and proceeded to benchmark guarantee transaction using external CUP method, since data under CUP method was not available and data margins under TNMM was readily available and held that it would be appropriate to apply

The Bank of Nova Scotia, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It)-1(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 820/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं . 4981/मुं/2017 (नि.व.2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar andFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Sr. AR

following the TNMM and comparability analysis showed an arithmetic mean margin (operating profit to operating cost) of 15.28%. However, the TPO has applied internal CUP method and computed an upward adjustment of Rs.40,58,558/-. In the TP study report the assessee has given the analysis of the aforesaid transactions ... issuing guarantees on behalf of its associated enterprises and rejected TNMM adopted by the assessee and proceeded to benchmark guarantee transaction using external CUP method, since data under CUP method was not available and data margins under TNMM was readily available and held that it would be appropriate to apply

The Bank of Nova Scotia, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) -1(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3065/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.4981/मुं/2017 (िन.व.2010-11) आअसं.3065/मुं/2018 (िन.व.2011-12) आअसं.820/मुं/2019(िन.व.2012-13) आअसं.863/मुं/2022 (िन.व.2013-14) The Bank Of Nova Scotia, Mittal Towers, B-Wing, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 020. Pan: Aaacb-1536-H ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Additional Director Of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3,/Dcit (It) 1(2)(1)Mumbai Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ....."ितवादी/Respondent आअसं.4899/मुं/2017 (िन.व. 2010-11) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax,(It)-1(2),Mumbai Room No.1811, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. The Bank Of Nova Scotia, Mittal Towers, B-Wing, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 020. Pan: Aaacb-1536-H ....."ितवादी/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Anil Sant, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar and Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Sr. AR

following the TNMM and comparability analysis showed an arithmetic mean margin (operating profit to operating cost) of 15.28%. However, the TPO has applied internal CUP method and computed an upward adjustment of Rs.40,58,558/-. In the TP study report the assessee has given the analysis of the aforesaid transactions ... issuing guarantees on behalf of its associated enterprises and rejected TNMM adopted by the assessee and proceeded to benchmark guarantee transaction using external CUP method, since data under CUP method was not available and data margins under TNMM was readily available and held that it would be appropriate to apply

Bank of Nova Scotia, Mumbai vs. Addl DIT (It) RG 3, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4981/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.4981/मुं/2017 (िन.व.2010-11) आअसं.3065/मुं/2018 (िन.व.2011-12) आअसं.820/मुं/2019(िन.व.2012-13) आअसं.863/मुं/2022 (िन.व.2013-14) The Bank Of Nova Scotia, Mittal Towers, B-Wing, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 020. Pan: Aaacb-1536-H ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Additional Director Of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3,/Dcit (It) 1(2)(1)Mumbai Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ....."ितवादी/Respondent आअसं.4899/मुं/2017 (िन.व. 2010-11) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax,(It)-1(2),Mumbai Room No.1811, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. The Bank Of Nova Scotia, Mittal Towers, B-Wing, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 020. Pan: Aaacb-1536-H ....."ितवादी/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Anil Sant, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar and Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Sr. AR

following the TNMM and comparability analysis showed an arithmetic mean margin (operating profit to operating cost) of 15.28%. However, the TPO has applied internal CUP method and computed an upward adjustment of Rs.40,58,558/-. In the TP study report the assessee has given the analysis of the aforesaid transactions ... issuing guarantees on behalf of its associated enterprises and rejected TNMM adopted by the assessee and proceeded to benchmark guarantee transaction using external CUP method, since data under CUP method was not available and data margins under TNMM was readily available and held that it would be appropriate to apply

DCIT (It) -1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. The Bank of Nova Scotia, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4899/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.4981/मुं/2017 (िन.व.2010-11) आअसं.3065/मुं/2018 (िन.व.2011-12) आअसं.820/मुं/2019(िन.व.2012-13) आअसं.863/मुं/2022 (िन.व.2013-14) The Bank Of Nova Scotia, Mittal Towers, B-Wing, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 020. Pan: Aaacb-1536-H ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Additional Director Of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3,/Dcit (It) 1(2)(1)Mumbai Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ....."ितवादी/Respondent आअसं.4899/मुं/2017 (िन.व. 2010-11) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax,(It)-1(2),Mumbai Room No.1811, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. The Bank Of Nova Scotia, Mittal Towers, B-Wing, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 020. Pan: Aaacb-1536-H ....."ितवादी/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Anil Sant, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar and Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Sr. AR

following the TNMM and comparability analysis showed an arithmetic mean margin (operating profit to operating cost) of 15.28%. However, the TPO has applied internal CUP method and computed an upward adjustment of Rs.40,58,558/-. In the TP study report the assessee has given the analysis of the aforesaid transactions ... issuing guarantees on behalf of its associated enterprises and rejected TNMM adopted by the assessee and proceeded to benchmark guarantee transaction using external CUP method, since data under CUP method was not available and data margins under TNMM was readily available and held that it would be appropriate to apply

The Boston Consulting Group India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1760/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blethe Boston Consulting Group (India) V. Dcit – 3(3)(2) Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 14Th Floor, Nariman Bhavan Mumbai - 400020 227, Nariman Point Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aabcb3524G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri J.D. Mistri Department Represented By : Shri Rajesh Pardeshi

Section 144C(5)Section 234DSection 244ASection 271(1)(c)Section 92C

other hand, Ld. DR objected to the submissions of the Ld.AR of the assessee and agreed that Ld TPO has not applied the CUP method properly and prayed that these issues under consideration may be remitted back to AO/TPO to redo the bench marking as per law. Page

At Kearney Ltd.- India Branch Office, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 960/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 27l

from those determined in the TP documentation. TPO held the arm's length price of the management services to be nil on application of CUP method as no uncontrolled enterprise would have paid any amount for services which do not tantamount to intra group services with demonstrable benefits. Based ... respects, along with contemporaneous documentary evidences, the arm's length payment for these intra group services would be treated as Nil by applying CUP method.” 4.1 The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee has failed to submit the evidences with regard to above i.e. for requisition/ rendition of services

At Kearney Ltd.- India Branch Office, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 959/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 27l

from those determined in the TP documentation. TPO held the arm's length price of the management services to be nil on application of CUP method as no uncontrolled enterprise would have paid any amount for services which do not tantamount to intra group services with demonstrable benefits. Based ... respects, along with contemporaneous documentary evidences, the arm's length payment for these intra group services would be treated as Nil by applying CUP method.” 4.1 The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee has failed to submit the evidences with regard to above i.e. for requisition/ rendition of services

DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. A.T. Kearney Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 1306/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 27l

from those determined in the TP documentation. TPO held the arm's length price of the management services to be nil on application of CUP method as no uncontrolled enterprise would have paid any amount for services which do not tantamount to intra group services with demonstrable benefits. Based ... respects, along with contemporaneous documentary evidences, the arm's length payment for these intra group services would be treated as Nil by applying CUP method.” 4.1 The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee has failed to submit the evidences with regard to above i.e. for requisition/ rendition of services

DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. A.T. Kearney Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 1305/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 27l

from those determined in the TP documentation. TPO held the arm's length price of the management services to be nil on application of CUP method as no uncontrolled enterprise would have paid any amount for services which do not tantamount to intra group services with demonstrable benefits. Based ... respects, along with contemporaneous documentary evidences, the arm's length payment for these intra group services would be treated as Nil by applying CUP method.” 4.1 The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee has failed to submit the evidences with regard to above i.e. for requisition/ rendition of services