SONY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 22(2), , DELHI
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above
ITA 3851/DEL/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2025
Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Ms. Madhumita Roysony India Private Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle 22 (2), A – 18, Mohan Cooperative Indl. Area, New Delhi. Mathura Road, New Delhi – 110 044. (Pan :Aabcs1571Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nageshwar Rao, Advocate Shri Parth, Advocate Revenue By : Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.09.2025 Date Of Order : 12.11.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appealpreferred By The Assesseeis Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 30.07.2024Passed By The Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) R.W.S. 144Bof The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2020- 21Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :-
For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)
making 'intensity adjustment' to adjust net
3
profit margin of comparable companies purportedly to equalise functions.
'Intensity adjustment' is mirror image of Bright Line Test (BLT) both are already invalidated by Hon'ble Courts.
7. Without prejudice to all other grounds, impugned order errs in quantifying AMP expense of appellant ... import of finished goods.
Protective Transfer Pricing Adjustment in respect of international transaction for Marketing and Market
Development functions
("MMDF") based on Bright Line Test ("BLT") approach
In law and facts of present case:
4
15. Impugned order errs in retaining protective assessment based on BLT
Contrary