“economic adjustment”

Transfer PricingSection 92CSection 92C88 judgments

The decision most relied on for economic adjustment is CIT v. Petro Araldite (P.) Ltd. (256 Taxmann 16), cited in 15 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on economic adjustment

CIT v. Petro Araldite (P.) Ltd.

256 Taxmann 16 · 2018 · High Court

citing judgments

Economic adjustments relating to capacity utilization and foreign exchange should be granted to the assessee when computing its margin under the TNMM.

Lionbridge Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. ITO

77 Taxmann.com 48 · 2017 · Reported

citing judgments

This case does not lay down a clear proposition of law based on the provided excerpts. The passages focus on listing other cases and describing the business of a company rather than stating a legal holding.

Judgments citing economic adjustment

M/S. Randox Laboratories India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 5(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2576/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.2576/Bang/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Randox Laboratories India Vs. The Asst.Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Plot No.191-195 & 246-250, Circle 5(1)(1), Bommasandra-Jigani Link Road, Bengaluru. Kiadb Industrial Area, Bengaluru – 560 105. Pan: Aadcr 0074 K Assessee Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishna Upadhyaya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sumeer Singh Meena, CIT(DR-OSD), ITAT, Bangalore

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92Section 92ASection 92CSection 92F

manner in which transfer pricing adjustment has been made, the approach adopted by the Ld.TPO in granting 17 comparable companies denying the economic adjustment claim made by the assessee, regarding computation of margins of the assessee, non consideration of supplementary transaction and denial of adequate opportunity of being heard

Rajasthan Prime Steel Processing Center Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. National E- Assessment Centre, New Delhi

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

ITA 488/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambledr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Shashi Bhusan Shukla, CIT DR

Section 143(3)

those elements of the lending rates that are common across all categories of borrowers. Hence, we direct that Base Rate be applied for according economic adjustment. 17. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 11 /11/2021. (Suchitra Kamble

Regus Gurgaon Metropolitan Business Centre Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 2, Gurugram

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

ITA 5357/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 234ASection 271Section 92C

length analysis. 7. The Ld. AO/ Ld. CIT(A) erred in not admitting the additional evidence and erred in not appreciating the economic adjustment on the capacity utilization of the Appellant, which should have been considered because of commercial or business reasons, which were duly demonstrated before tax authorities. General

Regus Gurgaon Metropolitan Business Centre Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 2, Gurugram

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

ITA 5356/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 234ASection 271Section 92C

Dassault Systems India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2486/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal [CIT] – DR

Section 143(3)Section 92C

length. 2.7 That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO / DRP / TPO erred in not providing appropriate economic adjustments, as required under Rule 10B(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules. 2.8 That on the facts and circumstances of the case

Cpa Global Support Services (I) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 6815/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surenderpal, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 274Section 92Section 92C

year 2010-11) data for comparability. 5. The Ld. DRP/Ld. AO/Ld. TPO erred in facts and in law by not providing the benefit of economic adjustments to the Appellant in arriving at the arm’s length price. 6. That the Ld. DRP/Ld. AO/Ld. TPO erred on facts

Prometric Testing Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Gurgaon

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 499/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 92C

fact that such companies had witnessed abnormal margin/growth during the year under consideration. 3.4 By upholding the approach of the Ld. TPO in denying economic adjustment for the difference in risk profile between the comparable companies and the Appellant. 3 ITA No. 499/Del./2015 & 397/Del./2015 3.5 By upholding

DCIT, Gurgaon vs. M/S. Prometric Testing (P) Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 397/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 92C