← All Phrases

“tested party”

Transfer PricingSection 92CSection 92C615 judgments

The decision most relied on for tested party is ITO v. E Value Serve.com (75 Taxmann.com 195), cited in 60 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on tested party

ITO v. E Value Serve.com
75 Taxmann.com 195 · 2016 · Reported
60
citing judgments

In transfer pricing analysis, demanding daily balances for working capital adjustments is impractical and improper; adjustments should be based on opening and closing working capital. Transfer pricing inherently involves estimation to ensure comparability.

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. ACIT
68 Taxmann.com 322 · 2016 · High Court
55
citing judgments

When benchmarking export transactions, the Associated Enterprise (AE) can be considered the tested party if it possesses the least complex functional analysis. The Assessing Officer's acceptance of a methodology in prior years can also support its use.

Capital IQ Information Systems India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
32 Taxmann.com 21 · 2013 · ITAT
44
citing judgments

A change in depreciation policy impacts an entity's profitability, which is a key factor in assessing its suitability as a comparable company for transfer pricing analysis.

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.

Development Consultants Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
115 TTJ 577 · 2008 · ITAT
24
citing judgments

The Arm's Length Price (ALP) must be determined on a transaction-by-transaction basis, and transactions should only be evaluated together if they are so closely linked or continuous that they cannot be adequately assessed separately. The 'tested party' for determining ALP should be the least complex entity.

Pr. CIT v. Aptara Technology (P.) Ltd.
92 Taxmann.com 240 · 2018 · High Court
23
citing judgments

A comparable company is not suitable if it has a significantly different business model, such as substantially higher outsourcing expenses as a percentage of operating costs, indicating a deviation from the tested party's operations.

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax
110 ITD 428 · 2008 · ITAT
22
citing judgments

The tested party in a transfer pricing analysis should be the entity for which reliable comparable data is readily available and requires the fewest adjustments. This generally means selecting the party with the less complex functional analysis.

Smt. Raj Rani Devi Ramna v. CIT
201 ITR 1032 · 1993 · High Court
21
citing judgments

The transfer of property does not necessarily occur upon registration; the true test is the intention of the parties and whether there are any conditions precedent like payment of consideration or delivery of the deed.

Judgments citing tested party

Brandix Apparal India Private Limited, Visakhapatnam vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 5(1), Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 627/VIZ/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.627/Viz/2018 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2014-15) Brandix Apparel India Private Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, Apsez, Pudimadaka Road, Circle-5(1), Atchutapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam – 530011. Pan: Aaccb 6569 L (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri Darpan Kriplani ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri Darpan KriplaniFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

main contention of the Ld. AR is that the assessee in its TP document submitted before us has determined the ALP of the Tested Party based on the combined results of Search-1 and Search-2 and has arrived at the following comparables and computed the arithmetic mean accordingly ... assessee has not demonstrated the working capital adjustments before the Ld. Revenue Authorities while determining the ALP under TNM method both for the Tested Party and the comparables. In the case of Devi Seafoods Ltd (supra) this Bench has taken the following view: When TNM method is considered

Teejay India Private Limited, Visakhapatnam vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 5(1), Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 626/VIZ/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपील सं./(I.T.)I.T.A.No.626/Viz/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15) Teejay India Private Limited Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Apsez, Pudimadaka Road Income Tax Atchutapuram Mandal Circle-5(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaaco9452H] (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""थ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Darpan Kirpalani ""ाथ" की ओर से / Respondent By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13.02.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Balakrishnan S

For Appellant: Shri Darpan KirpalaniFor Respondent: Dr.Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

assessee has not demonstrated the working capital adjustments before the Ld. Revenue Authorities while determining the ALP under TNM method both for the Tested Party and the comparables. In the case of Devi Seafoods Ltd (supra) this Bench has taken the following view: When TNM method is considered

DCIT, Circle-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Ifb Agro Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue in ITA No

ITA 491/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad&Shri Anikesh Banerjee]

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80ISection 92C

have any transaction with any unrelated enterprises. In the circumstances the unit at West Bengal cannot be considered as the tested party for the purposes of application of CUP. On the contrary, it is noted that the non-eligible unit was sourcing power both from the AE i.e. the eligible ... have any transaction with any unrelated enterprises. In the circumstances the unit at Madhya Pradesh cannot be considered as the tested party for the purposes of application of CUP. On the contrary, it is noted that the non- eligible unit i.e. cement unit was sourcing power both from

DCIT, Circle-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Ifb Agro Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue in ITA No

ITA 490/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad&Shri Anikesh Banerjee]

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80ISection 92C

have any transaction with any unrelated enterprises. In the circumstances the unit at West Bengal cannot be considered as the tested party for the purposes of application of CUP. On the contrary, it is noted that the non-eligible unit was sourcing power both from the AE i.e. the eligible ... have any transaction with any unrelated enterprises. In the circumstances the unit at Madhya Pradesh cannot be considered as the tested party for the purposes of application of CUP. On the contrary, it is noted that the non- eligible unit i.e. cement unit was sourcing power both from

Yokogawa India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Large Taxpayers Unit, Bangalore

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

ITA 2088/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 14A

final set of comparable companies; and (iv) incorrect exclusion of `commission income' and reversal of provisions for doubtful debts from operational income for computing tested party margin. 3. Kind attention was invited to Transfer Pricing Study [Pg. No. 202 @ 235/ Factual PB], wherein international transaction of trading is described

M/S Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT (Ltu)-1, Mumbai

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

ITA 575/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

Section 144ASection 32ASection 35Section 37(1)Section 80I

Besides it had exported R & D services to Switzerland, imported formulations from Argentina. In the Transfer pricing study, the assessee had selected AEs as ‘Tested party” and TNM method as most appropriate method. After examining the transfer pricing study of the assessee, the TPO took the view that the transfer ... accordingly, he did not accept the same. Hence, he asked the assessee to benchmark the international transactions by taking the “assessee” itself as tested party and adopting internal TNM method as most appropriate method. 8.2 The OP/OC of Formulations, both domestic and Export sales made

Asst CIT 1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Aje India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the ground of appeal of the Revenue and cross

ITA 7548/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Akhtar Hussain Ansari, Sr. DR

appreciate that if foreign AE is treated as a the la. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that if foreign AE is treated as a tested party, then comparables must also be from the same tested party, then comparables must also be from the same tested party, then comparables must also ... erred in impliedly approving assessee's foreign AB, the la. CIT(A) erred in impliedly approving assessee's foreign AB, M/s Ayacucho, as tested party without appreciating t M/s Ayacucho, as tested party without appreciating the fact that the he fact that the assessee has not demonstrated any valid justification

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

ITA 4980/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Anil Sant
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 92C(2)

Page 1 11 Appeals The Bank of Novascotia Vs. ADIT(IT) 3(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I

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

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4898/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Anil Sant
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 92C(2)

Page 1 11 Appeals The Bank of Novascotia Vs. ADIT(IT) 3(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I

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

ITA 3862/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Anil Sant
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 92C(2)

Page 1 11 Appeals The Bank of Novascotia Vs. ADIT(IT) 3(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I

DDIT (It) 3(2), Mumbai vs. The Bank of Nova Scotia, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are also partly allowed

ITA 3828/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita No.8841/Mum/2010 The Bank Of Nova Scotia Vs. Assistant Director Of Mittal Towers, B Wing Income Tax (It) -3(2) Nariman Point Scindia House Mumbai – 400 020 Ballard Pier Mumbai – 400 038 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacb1536H Appellant .. Respondent It(Tp)A. No.3862/Mum/2013 The Bank Of Nova Scotia Vs. Additional Director Of Mittal Towers, B Wing Income Tax (It) -3 Nariman Point Air India Building Mumbai – 400 020 Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb1536H Appellant .. Respondent Ita.No.3989/Mum/2012 Deputy Director Of Income Vs. M/S The Bank Of Nova Tax (It) -3(2) Scotia, Mittal Towers, B Scindia House Wing, Nariman Point Ballard Pier, N. M. Road Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 038

For Appellant: Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Anil Sant
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 92C(2)

very very negligible due to reduced time span involved therein. Given these undisputed facts, it would be appropriate to consider assessee as the tested party as it would be the least complex entity and its profitability could be reliably ascertained Admittedly, the transaction which requires to be benchmarked

The Bank of Nova Scotia, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT (It) 3, Mumbai

ITA 4036/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Anil Sant
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 92C(2)

Page 1 11 Appeals The Bank of Novascotia Vs. ADIT(IT) 3(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I

ADIT Cir 3(2), Mumbai vs. The Bank of Nova Scotia, Mumbai

ITA 3989/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Anil Sant
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 92C(2)

Page 1 11 Appeals The Bank of Novascotia Vs. ADIT(IT) 3(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I

The Bank of Nova Scotia, Mumbai vs. ADIT (It) 3(2), Mumbai

ITA 5740/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Anil Sant
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 92C(2)

Page 1 11 Appeals The Bank of Novascotia Vs. ADIT(IT) 3(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I

ADIT (It) 3(2), Mumbai vs. The Bank Nova Scotia, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5634/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Anil Sant
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 92C(2)

Page 1 11 Appeals The Bank of Novascotia Vs. ADIT(IT) 3(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I

The Bank of Nova Scotia, Mumbai vs. ADIT (It) 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and

ITA 8841/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Anil Sant
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 92C(2)

very very negligible due to reduced time span involved therein. Given these undisputed facts, it would be appropriate to consider assessee as the tested party as it would be the least complex entity and its profitability could be reliably ascertained Admittedly, the transaction which requires to be benchmarked

The ADIT (It)-3(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. the Bank of Novascotia, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4655/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Anil Sant
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 92C(2)

Page 1 11 Appeals The Bank of Novascotia Vs. ADIT(IT) 3(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I

Schott Glass India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, ITA 7356/Mum/2014 of the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and ITA No

ITA 7356/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Amarjit Singhschott Glass India Private Vs. Income Tax Officer 8(3)-1 Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Room No. 201, Aayakar 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai – 400020 Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Schott Glass India Private Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Income Tax 8(3) 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 204, Aayakar Andheri Kurla Road, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400020 Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ketan Ved Respondent By : Mahesh Jiwade Date Of Hearing 12.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.01.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): Both These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Agasint The Different Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-15, Mumbai. Since Both These Appeals

For Appellant: Ketan VedFor Respondent: Mahesh Jiwade
Section 143(2)Section 144C(1)Section 92C

Companies selected by the TPO, therefore, there is need for making an adjustment to eliminate the difference in the accounting policies for the tested parties and the comparable companies. Having heard the contention of the appellant, as per Rule 10B(3), the margin of the comparables and the tested party ... affects the net profit margin had to be taken into account so as to have the fair comparison while determining the ALP of the tested party's transaction. (vi) Therefore, this question does not give rise to any substantial question of law as Rule

Schott Glass India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T. Circle 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, ITA 7356/Mum/2014 of the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and ITA No

ITA 2594/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Amarjit Singhschott Glass India Private Vs. Income Tax Officer 8(3)-1 Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Room No. 201, Aayakar 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai – 400020 Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Schott Glass India Private Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Income Tax 8(3) 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 204, Aayakar Andheri Kurla Road, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400020 Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ketan Ved Respondent By : Mahesh Jiwade Date Of Hearing 12.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.01.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): Both These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Agasint The Different Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-15, Mumbai. Since Both These Appeals

For Appellant: Ketan VedFor Respondent: Mahesh Jiwade
Section 143(2)Section 144C(1)Section 92C

Companies selected by the TPO, therefore, there is need for making an adjustment to eliminate the difference in the accounting policies for the tested parties and the comparable companies. Having heard the contention of the appellant, as per Rule 10B(3), the margin of the comparables and the tested party ... affects the net profit margin had to be taken into account so as to have the fair comparison while determining the ALP of the tested party's transaction. (vi) Therefore, this question does not give rise to any substantial question of law as Rule

M/S Limagrain India Pvt. Ltd., Secunderabad, Hydrabad vs. N.F.A.C, Delhi

ITA 65/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18 M/S.Limagrain India National Faceless Private Limited, Assessment Centre, H.No. 1-8-201 To 203, Delhi Ashoka My Home बनाम/ Chambers, Flat No. 208, 209, 2Nd Vs. Floor, S.P.Road, Secunderabad, Hyderabad (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaccb6862A Assessee By Shri Pankaj Sancheti, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 19.01.2024

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

relevant to AY 2017-18 under consideration. Further, in the “TPSR”, the benchmarking had been done by taking assessee’s foreign AE as tested party and using foreign database, this is faulty. (iii) The assessee has not only failed to submit evidences of actual receipt of service but also failed