← 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

M/S. Xchanging Solutions Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 7(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 2570/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2022AY 2015-16
For Respondent: Shri Padam Chand Khincha
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

which could affect the arm’s length nature of their operating margins. Accordingly, companies engaged in software services were considered as comparable to the tested party’s business activities. Please note that while performing the analysis, factors taken into consideration for judging comparability were characteristics of functions performed and assets

Jardine Lloyd Thomposn India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 15(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1319/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1319/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11) Marsh Mclennan Global बिधम/ Ito, Range-15(2)(2) Services India Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. (Formerly Known As Jardine Mumbai-400020. Lloyd Thompson India Pvt. Ltd.) 1001-A, Supreme Business Park, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai-400076. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcj8288K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Nishant Thakkar / Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala Revenue By: Ms. Samruddhi Hande (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/08/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Challenging The Assessment Order Dated 28.01.2015 Passed For Ay. 2010-11 By Ao U/S 143(3) R.W.S 144C (13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) In Pursuance To The Directions Given By The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp).

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar / Ms. JasminFor Respondent: Ms. Samruddhi Hande (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 92C(3)

Tribunal in Hapag Lloyd Global Services Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No. 7539/Mum/2014 held that the turnover of Infosys BPO is very high comparative to tested party and excluded and excluded this comparable. Considering the consistent view of Hon’ble Delhi High Court, Hon’ble Bombay High Court and co-ordinate

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT(It) 1(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5129/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

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

M/S. Onmobile Global Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 5(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2560/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 244ASection 32

transaction, the Assessee benchmarked the transactions entered into with each of the subsidiaries independently, by taking each of the subsidiaries as the tested party. In addition to the above transactions, the Assessee rendered software development services to Voxmobili, USA, (AE) which were benchmarked independently. The income from the software development ... under the head ‘Business Development Services rendered’. Since the Assessee was the least complex entity to this transaction, the Assessee selected itself as the tested party and benchmarked the transaction. In the transfer pricing study maintained by the Assessee, on selection of certain companies as comparables, the Assessee arrived

M/S Onmobile Global Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 139/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 244ASection 32

transaction, the Assessee benchmarked the transactions entered into with each of the subsidiaries independently, by taking each of the subsidiaries as the tested party. In addition to the above transactions, the Assessee rendered software development services to Voxmobili, USA, (AE) which were benchmarked independently. The income from the software development ... under the head ‘Business Development Services rendered’. Since the Assessee was the least complex entity to this transaction, the Assessee selected itself as the tested party and benchmarked the transaction. In the transfer pricing study maintained by the Assessee, on selection of certain companies as comparables, the Assessee arrived

M/S. Airbus Group India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2385/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Sumeet Khurana, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92D

IT(TP)A No.2385/Bang/2019 M/s. Airbus Group India Private Limited, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Komli Wedia India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, ITA No.3889/Mum/2017 for A

ITA 3890/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Samruddhi D Hande, DR

method as the most appropriate method taking the profit level indicator of GP ratio and itself as tested party identified four different comparables. The margin of the comparables was determined at arithmetic mean of 14.73% and margin of the assessee was computed at 18% and submitted that the transaction

DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Komli Wedia India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, ITA No.3889/Mum/2017 for A

ITA 3889/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Samruddhi D Hande, DR

method as the most appropriate method taking the profit level indicator of GP ratio and itself as tested party identified four different comparables. The margin of the comparables was determined at arithmetic mean of 14.73% and margin of the assessee was computed at 18% and submitted that the transaction

Interactive Brokers (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4860/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri O. P. Kant, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. (Tp) No.2088/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4860/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14) Interactive Brokers (India) बिधम/ Dcit-4(1)(1) Pvt Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 502/A, Times Square, Mumbai. Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400059. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabci6871R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Jeet Kamdar Revenue By: Shri Pankaj Kumar (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09/06/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/07/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Assessing Officer Dated 30.01.2017 First For A.Y.2012-13 & Assessment Order Dated 23.05.2017 For A.Y.2013-14 U/S 143(3) R.W. Section 144C(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). 2. We First Take Up The Appeal For Ay 2012-13. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Read As Under: - “Ground No.1 Disallowance Of Cost Of Administrative Support Services For Internal Audit Support, Clearing & Treasury Support Function 1.1 On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Dispute Resolution Panel (‘(Drp')/ Income Tax Officer — Dcit, Range 4(1)(1) (‘Ao’) / Learned Transfer Pricing Officer (‘Tpo’) Erred In Re-Computing The Alp Of The International Transaction Of Payment Of Administrative Support Service Fee For Internal Audit Support, Clearing & Treasury Support Function By The Appellant To Its 2

For Appellant: Shri Jeet KamdarFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 92C

Transactional Net Margin Method (‘TNMM’) taking the assessee as 5 ITA. (TP) No.2088/Mum/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Interactive Brokers (India) Pvt. Ltd. the tested party and it was claimed that the same is at arm's length from the Indian Regulations perspective. 6. In the course of transfer pricing ... noted that in the TP study, TNMM was considered as the Most Appropriate Method and the assessee was taken as the tested party. In the course of assessment however, the assessee furnished a new benchmarking study wherein foreign AE was taken as the tested party. The Ld. AR was unable

Interactive Brokers (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2088/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri O. P. Kant, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. (Tp) No.2088/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4860/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14) Interactive Brokers (India) बिधम/ Dcit-4(1)(1) Pvt Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 502/A, Times Square, Mumbai. Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400059. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabci6871R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Jeet Kamdar Revenue By: Shri Pankaj Kumar (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09/06/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/07/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Assessing Officer Dated 30.01.2017 First For A.Y.2012-13 & Assessment Order Dated 23.05.2017 For A.Y.2013-14 U/S 143(3) R.W. Section 144C(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). 2. We First Take Up The Appeal For Ay 2012-13. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Read As Under: - “Ground No.1 Disallowance Of Cost Of Administrative Support Services For Internal Audit Support, Clearing & Treasury Support Function 1.1 On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Dispute Resolution Panel (‘(Drp')/ Income Tax Officer — Dcit, Range 4(1)(1) (‘Ao’) / Learned Transfer Pricing Officer (‘Tpo’) Erred In Re-Computing The Alp Of The International Transaction Of Payment Of Administrative Support Service Fee For Internal Audit Support, Clearing & Treasury Support Function By The Appellant To Its 2

For Appellant: Shri Jeet KamdarFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 92C

Transactional Net Margin Method (‘TNMM’) taking the assessee as 5 ITA. (TP) No.2088/Mum/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Interactive Brokers (India) Pvt. Ltd. the tested party and it was claimed that the same is at arm's length from the Indian Regulations perspective. 6. In the course of transfer pricing ... noted that in the TP study, TNMM was considered as the Most Appropriate Method and the assessee was taken as the tested party. In the course of assessment however, the assessee furnished a new benchmarking study wherein foreign AE was taken as the tested party. The Ld. AR was unable

Mylan Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T. 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee and Revenue is partly allowed and the cross-objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1467/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2022AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Ms. Hirali Desai/AmolFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kalra

noted that, the assessee had selected Operating Profit/Total Cost (OP/TC) as the Profit Level Indicator (PLI). The assessee was taken as the tested party and the OP/TC of the assessee was computed at 24.64%. The PLI of the seven (7) comparables identified by the assessee, was worked

ACIT 6(3), Mumbai vs. Mylan Developemtnt Centre P.Ltd ( Formelry Merck Development Centre P.Ltd ), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee and Revenue is partly allowed and the cross-objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1283/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2022AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Ms. Hirali Desai/AmolFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kalra

noted that, the assessee had selected Operating Profit/Total Cost (OP/TC) as the Profit Level Indicator (PLI). The assessee was taken as the tested party and the OP/TC of the assessee was computed at 24.64%. The PLI of the seven (7) comparables identified by the assessee, was worked

Lg Soft India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 266/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Rashmi R., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, D.R
Section 143(3)

types of inventory) 16. Making a working capital adjustment is an attempt to adjust for the differences in time value of money between the tested party and potential comparables, with an assumption that the difference should be reflected in profits. The underlying reasoning is that: A company will need funding ... factors have to be kept in mind (i) The point in time at which the Receivables, Inventory and Payables should be compared between the tested party and the comparables, whether it should be the figures of receivables, inventory and payable at the year end or beginning of the year

Airlinq Technology Private Limited (Formerly Known As Globetouch Technologies Private Limited), Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 231/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am It(Tp)A No.231/Bang/2021 : Asst.Year 2016-2017 M/S.Airlinq Technology Pvt. Ltd. The Deputy Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Globe Touch Income-Tax, Circle 3(1)(1) V. Bangalore. Technologies Private Limited) 306, 100 Feet Road, Binna Mangala Stage – 1, Indiranagar Bangalore – 560 038. Pan : Aafcg7626L. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : S/Sri.Ajit Kumar Jain & Siddesh Chaugule, Cas Respondent By : Dr.Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 28.07.2022 Date Of Hearing : 21.07.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 29.03.2021 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2016-2017. 3. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Was Incorporated On 15.10.2014 As A Wholly Owned Subsidiary Of Globetouch Inc, Usa. The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Rendering Software Development Services (Swd) To Globetouch Inc. For The Assessment Year 2016-2017, The Return Of Income Was Filed Declaring An Income Of Rs.4,23,01,510 Under The Normal Provisions Of The Income-Tax Act. The Assessment Was Selected

For Appellant: S/Sri.Ajit Kumar Jain & Siddesh Chaugule, CAsFor Respondent: Dr.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92D

powers of enhancement held that no adjustment should be made to the profit margins on account of working capital differences between the tested party and the comparable companies for the following reasons: (i) The daily working capital levels of the tested party and the comparables was the only reliable basis ... because it is not an exact science. One has to see that reasonable adjustment is being made so as to bring both comparable and test party on same footing. Therefore there is little merit in CIT (A)'s objection on working adjustment based on unavailable daily working capital requirements data

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

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

ITA 477/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Smt. Rashmi R., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

powers of enhancement held that no adjustment should be made to the profit margins on account of working capital differences between the tested party and the comparable companies for the following reasons: (i) The daily working capital levels of the tested party and the comparables was the only reliable basis ... No.477/Bang/2021 Page 9 of 20 science. One has to see that reasonable adjustment is being made so as to bring both comparable and test party on same footing. Therefore there is little merit in CIT (A)'s objection on working adjustment based on unavailable daily working capital requirements data. There

DCIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Tech Mahindra P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3033/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri H.P. MahajaniFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay
Section 10ASection 250Section 2D

Rules" without providing any cogent reasons for the same or pointing out any material deficiencies therein. 1.3.1 Incorrect rejection of AE us the tested party On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned TPO / AO erred in and the learned CIT(A) erred ... upholding the rejection of selection of the Associated Enterprise as the tested party in the Transfer Pricing documentation maintained by the appellant, arrived at after detailed functional and economic analysis of the transacting parties and the international transaction under consideration as mandated by the Rule 108(2) of the Rules

M/S. Sulzer Tech India P. Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. Addl./Jt./ Dy./ Asstt. CIT/ Income Tax Officer, Delhi

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

ITA 633/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Saeana a/wFor Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92CSection 92C(1)

Profit Level Indicator (‘PLI‟) of operating profit to M/s. Sulzer Tech India Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.633/Mum./2021 total expenses. By considering itself as the tested party, assessee identified following 4 companies as comparable:- i) Mahindra Consulting Engineers Ltd.; ii) Tata Consulting Engineers Ltd.; iii) Desein ... aforesaid associated enterprise for availing such IT support services. For benchmarking, the associated enterprise was considered as tested party. Further, Cost Plus Method was selected as the most appropriate method with PLI of operating profit to total expenses. Accordingly, assessee selected 68 comparables from both APAC and EU regions, whose

M/S Ingersoll-Rand Climate Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 729/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

said international transactions. The profit level indication (PLI) adopted by the assessee was gross profit/sale and the assessee has made itself tested party for the purpose of international transactions. The TPO rejected the transfer pricing study of the assessee and opined that transactional net margin method was to be applied

Torrecid India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7076/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Acit Circle 11(3)(1) Torrecid India Private Limited 2Nd Floor, Plot No.29, 30, 31, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Alindra, Savli Gidc, Vadodara, Vadodara–391775 Mk Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadct 4321 M

For Appellant: Shri Sunil M. Lala, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Neelu Jaggi, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92

respect to the transaction of import of from material from clichés SA Mexico AE, assessee adopted CUP method taking the foreign AE as a tested party compared with the prices charged by the comparable companies and stated that the prices charged to the assessee is less than the price charged ... With respect to the transaction of import of raw material from Toreecid SA, Al fabren SA, Torrecid Suzhou, assessee adopted the foreign AES tested party adopted profit level indicator of operating profit/total cost and found that tested party results are less than the result of comparable companies and concluded that

Addl CIT RG 4(3), Mumbai vs. Morgan Stanley India Company P. Ltd ( Formerly Known As J M Morgan Stanley Securities P. Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the learned Assessing Officer is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2320/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Morgan Stanley India Company Addl. Cit, P. Ltd. Range 4(3), 18F/19F One Indiabulls Centre, Room No. 635, 6Th Floor, Tower 2-B, 841, Vs. Jupiter Mills Off Senapati Bapat Aaykar Bhavan Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 013 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaacj 4998 F Morgan Stanley India Company Addl. Cit, P. Ltd. Range 4(3), 18F/19F One Indiabulls Centre, Room No. 635, 6Th Floor, Tower 2-B, 841, Vs. Jupiter Mills Off Senapati Bapat Aaykar Bhavan Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 013 (Respondent) (Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil M. Lala, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsalaa Jha, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 250Section 40Section 40A(2)

direct than the Transactional Net Margin Method. ii. He also rejected the contention of the assessee with internal CUP, using the Mauritius as the tested party to arrive at arms length price. iii. He followed his own decision for A.Y. 2004-05 in case of assessee where for the trade