← 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

The India Cements Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1) Chennai, Chennai

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

ITA 2174/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jan 2026AY 2017-18
Section 10(39)Section 115JSection 14A

following the Comparable Uncontrolled Price Method [hereinafter referred to as CUP]. While undertaking the benchmarking exercise, the non-eligible unit was taken as the 'tested party' and the transfer price of power supplied by the eligible units to the manufacturing unit was benchmarked at the annual average of the landed

Thermo Fisher Scientific India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 7294/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Anmol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 32(1)

international transaction of purchase of finished goods, the assessee adopted the Resale Price Method (“RPM) as the most appropriate method. By considering itself the tested party, the assessee identified the following five comparable companies with an arithmetic mean gross margin, i.e., gross profit by sales, of 23.06%: - S.No. Name ... benchmarking the said international transaction, the assessee adopted the Comparable Uncontrolled Price ("CUP") method as the most appropriate method. By considering itself as a tested party, the assessee selected the following comparable companies by conducting a search on Royaltystat database: Sr. No. Contractors Commission rate % 1 Hand Innovations

Thermo Fisher Scientific India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2014-

ITA 7393/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Anmol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 32(1)

international transaction of purchase of finished goods, the assessee adopted the Resale Price Method (“RPM”) as the most appropriate method. By considering itself the tested party, the assessee identified the following five comparable companies with an arithmetic mean gross margin, i.e., gross profit by sales, of 23.06%: - S.No. | Name ... benchmarking the said international transaction, the assessee adopted the Comparable Uncontrolled Price ("CUP”) method as the most appropriate method. By considering itself as a tested party, the assessee selected the ITAs No.1236/Mum/2016, 577/Mum/2017, 7393/Mum/2017 & 7294/Mum /2018 [By (AYs. 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) [am following comparable companies

Thermo Fisher Scientific India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 577/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Anmol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 32(1)

international transaction of purchase of finished goods, the assessee adopted the Resale Price Method (“RPM) as the most appropriate method. By considering itself the tested party, the assessee identified the following five comparable companies with an arithmetic mean gross margin, i.e., gross profit by sales, of 23.06%: - S.No. Name ... benchmarking the said international transaction, the assessee adopted the Comparable Uncontrolled Price ("CUP") method as the most appropriate method. By considering itself as a tested party, the assessee selected the following comparable companies by conducting a search on Royaltystat database: Sr. No. Contractors Commission rate % 1 Hand Innovations

Thermo Fisher Scienftific India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2014-

ITA 1236/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Anmol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 32(1)

international transaction of purchase of finished goods, the assessee adopted the Resale Price Method (“RPM”) as the most appropriate method. By considering itself the tested party, the assessee identified the following five comparable companies with an arithmetic mean gross margin, i.e., gross profit by sales, of 23.06%: - S.No. | Name ... benchmarking the said international transaction, the assessee adopted the Comparable Uncontrolled Price ("CUP”) method as the most appropriate method. By considering itself as a tested party, the assessee selected the ITAs No.1236/Mum/2016, 577/Mum/2017, 7393/Mum/2017 & 7294/Mum /2018 [By (AYs. 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) [am following comparable companies

Schineler India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dcitrg 15(3) (2), Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 6 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 724/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Schindler India Pvt Ltd Dcit Schindler House, Main Street, Range 15(3) (2) Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Vs. Mumbai Mumbai - 400076 (Pan: Aaecs1548J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Ms. Chandani Shah, Ms. Niddhi Agarwal & Ms. Riddhi Maru, Cas Revenue : Shri Ajay Chandra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Final Assessment Order Passed By National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (Nfac) Vide Order No. Itba/Ast/S/143(3)/2021-22/1040015716(1) Dated 22.02.2022 U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”) Pursuant To The Directions Of Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel-2, Mumbai, (Drp) Vide Order No. Itba/Drp/F/144C(5)/2021-22/1039079646(1), Dated 25.01.2022, Passed U/S. 144C(5), For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Grounds Taken By Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: “Ground I. Legal Grounds

For Appellant: Ms. Chandani Shah, Ms. Niddhi Agarwal and Ms. Riddhi Maru, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

analysis as undertaken by the Appellant merely for a reason the comparables selection are the foreign comparables which is based on the selection of tested party, However, the learned AO/TPO erred by not providing any reasons to reject the AE as the tested party e. In concluding that the Appellant

Luxottica India Eyewear Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1492/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Manish Agarwalluxottica India Eyewear Pvt. Ltd., Asst. Cit, 7Th Floor, Dlf Building No.9, Circle-15(2), Tower-B, Phase-Iii, Dlf Cyber Vs. New Delhi. City, Gurgaon-122002, Haryana. Pan-Aabcl3871C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Adv., Ca Department By Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jaiswal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 30.01.2015 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S.144C(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’) In Compliance To The Direction Given By Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) Vide Order Dated 15.12.2014 For Asst. Year 2010-11. 2. In The Present Appeal, The Co-Ordinate Bench Vide Order Dated 26.05.2017 In Ita No.1492/Del/2015 Has Remand The Issue Of Tp Adjustment Towards Alleged Amp Expenses To The File Of Tpo To Decide Afresh With Certain Directions, However, Luxottica India Eyewear Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Ground In Respect Of Tp Adjustment Made Towards International Transactions Of Import Of Finished Goods Remained Un-Adjudicated.

Section 143(3)Section 92C

situation, wherein the property or services purchased from an associated enterprise are resold to unrelated enterprises. Further more, RPM is generally adopted where the tested party ie. trader purchases from an associated enterprise and resells to an independent enterprise without adding substantial value to the product, or does not contribute

DCIT, Circle 3(4), Mumbai vs. Tata Consultancy Services Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of both, revenue and assessee are partly

ITA 2245/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR
Section 92CSection 92C(3)

characterization of international transaction The Id. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts of the case in not accepting the Appellant as the tested party even though the international transaction during the year under reference was provision of services by the Appellant to its AEs. 3.2 Disregarding the legally ... Pricing Documentation report. 15 Selection of the comparable companies Without prejudice to the above, even if the Als are to be treated as the tested party and gross profit sales is selected as the appropriate PLI, the id. CIT(A) end in rejecting functionally similar companies. ITA No. 1516/Mum/2025

DCIT, Circle 3 4, Mumbai vs. Tata Consultancy Services Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of both, revenue and assessee are partly

ITA 2244/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR
Section 92CSection 92C(3)

characterization of international transaction The Id. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts of the case in not accepting the Appellant as the tested party even though the international transaction during the year under reference was provision of services by the Appellant to its AEs. 3.2 Disregarding the legally ... Pricing Documentation report. 15 Selection of the comparable companies Without prejudice to the above, even if the Als are to be treated as the tested party and gross profit sales is selected as the appropriate PLI, the id. CIT(A) end in rejecting functionally similar companies. ITA No. 1516/Mum/2025

DCIT, Circle 3(4), Mumbai vs. Tata Consultancy Services Limited, Mumbai

ITA 2243/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 92CSection 92C(3)

characterization of international transaction The Id. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts of the case in not accepting the Appellant as the tested party even though the international transaction during the year under reference was provision of services by the Appellant to its AEs. 3.2 Disregarding the legally ... Pricing Documentation report. 15 Selection of the comparable companies Without prejudice to the above, even if the Als are to be treated as the tested party and gross profit sales is selected as the appropriate PLI, the id. CIT(A) end in rejecting functionally similar companies. 4 Provision of guarantees

Tata Consultancy Services Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Incometax 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of both, revenue and assessee are partly allowed for all the three assessment years

ITA 1518/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate and Shri Manish Kumar Kanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR
Section 1Section 92CSection 92C(3)

characterization of international transaction The Id. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts of the case in not accepting the Appellant as the tested party even though the international transaction during the year under reference was provision of services by the Appellant to its AEs. 3.2 Disregarding the legally ... Pricing Documentation report. 15 Selection of the comparable companies Without prejudice to the above, even if the Als are to be treated as the tested party and gross profit sales is selected as the appropriate PLI, the id. CIT(A) end in rejecting functionally similar companies. Tata Consultancy Services

Tata Consultancy Services Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Incometax 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of both, revenue and assessee are partly

ITA 1517/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR
Section 92CSection 92C(3)

characterization of international transaction The Id. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts of the case in not accepting the Appellant as the tested party even though the international transaction during the year under reference was provision of services by the Appellant to its AEs. 3.2 Disregarding the legally ... Pricing Documentation report. 15 Selection of the comparable companies Without prejudice to the above, even if the Als are to be treated as the tested party and gross profit sales is selected as the appropriate PLI, the id. CIT(A) end in rejecting functionally similar companies. ITA No. 1516/Mum/2025

Tata Consultancy Services Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Incometax 3(4), Mumbai

ITA 1516/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 92CSection 92C(3)

characterization of international transaction The Id. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts of the case in not accepting the Appellant as the tested party even though the international transaction during the year under reference was provision of services by the Appellant to its AEs. 3.2 Disregarding the legally ... Pricing Documentation report. 3.5 Selection of the comparable companies Without prejudice to the above, even if the Als are to be treated as the tested party and gross profit sales is selected as the appropriate PLI, the id. CIT(A) end in rejecting functionally similar companies. 4 Provision of guarantees

Priyanka Sandeep Runwal, Mumbai vs. The Dy Comm. of Income Tax, CC-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of t

ITA 6524/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

For Respondent: Mr. Vaibhav Mehta
Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI ANIKESH

Priyanka Sandeep Runwal, Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT CC-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of t

ITA 6523/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

For Respondent: Mr. Vaibhav Mehta
Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI ANIKESH

Priyanka Sandeep Runwal, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle -4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of t

ITA 6522/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

For Respondent: Mr. Vaibhav Mehta
Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI ANIKESH

Sresta Natural Bioproducts Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 711/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.711/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2020-2021 Sresta Natural Bioproducts Private Limited, Hyderabad. The Dcit, Circle-3(1), Vs. Pin – 500 081. Hyderabad – 500 081. Telangana. Telangana. Pan Aahcs9571J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca P Murali Mohan Rao राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19.12.2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 153Section 92CSection 92C(3)

price'. 4.3. The Ld. AO ought to have considered the segmental information which provides more reliability on comparability factors with relevant operations of the tested party. 4.4. The Ld. TPO ought to have appreciated that the fundamental principle of transfer pricing is that the margins earned from covered transaction

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

ITA 2767/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 143(3)

115/Mum/2025 9 External Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method. No internal CUP was available with the assessee as AE was treated as the tested party. The method of determining the ALP of the transactions by assessee in the TP study was as under:- "1. The credit rating of the AE (entity ... were searched. The average at which comparable companies have taken loan is arm length price. 3. The AE was treated as tested party.” 4. 8. Assessee had also provided details in the TP study report regarding the credit rating of the borrower (Mauritius AE):- “2.1 Creditworthiness of the borrower There

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

ITA 2367/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 143(3)

were submitted as under:- External Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method. No internal CUP was available with the assessee as AE was treated as the tested party. The method of determining the ALP of the transactions by assessee in the TP study was as under:- "1. The credit rating ... were searched. The average at which comparable companies have taken loan is arm length price. 3. The AE was treated as tested party.” 4. 8. Assessee had also provided details in the TP study report regarding the credit rating of the borrower (Mauritius AE):- “2.1 Creditworthiness of the borrower There

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

ITA 2366/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 143(3)

basis of External Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method. No internal CUP was available with the assessee as AE was treated as the tested party. The method of determining the ALP of the transactions by assessee in the TP study was as under:- "1. The credit rating of the AE (entity ... were searched. The average at which comparable companies have taken loan is arm length price. 3. The AE was treated as tested party." 4. 8. Assessee had also provided details in the TP study report regarding the credit rating of the borrower (Mauritius AE):- “2.1 Creditworthiness of the borrower There