← All Phrases

“safe harbour”

Chapter X - Transfer Pricing / Anti-AvoidanceSection 92CBSection 92CB / Rule 10TIA, 10TIB, 10TIC182 judgments

The decision most relied on for safe harbour is Maria Fernandes Cheryl v. ITO (International Taxation) (123 Taxmann.com 252), cited in 65 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on safe harbour

Maria Fernandes Cheryl v. ITO (International Taxation)
123 Taxmann.com 252 · 2021 · ITAT
65
citing judgments

The amendment introducing a tolerance band (safe harbour) under section 50C, allowing a difference of up to 10% between actual sale consideration and stamp duty valuation, applies retrospectively. If the difference falls within this limit, the actual sale consideration is adopted as the full value of consideration for computing capital gains.

Lionbridge Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. ITO
77 Taxmann.com 48 · 2017 · Reported
10
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 safe harbour

Gsr Industries, Noida vs. DDIT, International Taxation, Noida

ITA 2060/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Dec 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Prakash. K. Sinha, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144(15)Section 144CSection 144C(15)Section 153(1)Section 92C

further it has not been disputed by the AO. The assessee has also submitted that this cost plus markup is much more than the safe harbour rule of 8.5%. Since this is the consistent practice of the assessee to benchmark its revenue on the cost plus 15% basis

M/S. Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT2(3) (1) -, Mumbai

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

ITA 468/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2023AY 2017-18
Section 143Section 234Section 234BSection 80

therefore, the ALP has to be determined in terms of Clause (ii) to Explanation to Section 80-IA (8). TPO also referred to the „Safe Harbour Rules‟ notified by CBDT wherein it provides that the company engaged in the business of generation of power, the rates for the supply ... Tata Chemicals Ltd. which is an electricity generation unit in whose case per unit has been determined at Rs.3.99/- which is in accordance with Safe Harbour Rules and also specific external CUP in the case of electricity generation unit. Secondly, he submitted that wherever transfer of goods and services falls

Computer Sciences Corporation India Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

ITA 1654/CHNY/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2007-08 Computer Sciences Acit, Corporation India Private Company Circle 1(3), Limited, Chennai [Formerly Covansys (India) Private Limited], बनाम/ Unit 13, Block 2, Sdf Buildings, Vs. Madras Export Processing Zone, Tambaram, Chennai (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaacc1351M Assessee By Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. Shri Abhishek Agrawal, Ca Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 12.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 92C

acceptable lower range of 8.80% and higher rate of 20.25% of PLI. Therefore, the assessee claimed that its own PLI of 14.16% was within safe harbour range of mean PLI of comparables at Page 7 of 47 Computer Sciences Corporation India Private Limited, Chennai Assessment year 2007-08 14.53% [with ... best yardstick for benchmarking. Then, he submitted that the PLI of Bangalore Unit-I at (-)7.95% and Bangalore SBU at (-)0.25% is within safe harbour range of (-)/(+)5% of (-)4.97% PLI of Mumbai Unit. Therefore, the transactions undertaken by Bangalore Unit-I and Bangalore SBU must be considered

Mondelez India Foods P.Ltd (Formerly Known As Cadbury India Limited), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 5(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2013-14 is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7104/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 14A

section 92C(1) - Held, yes [Para 66] II. Section 92C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Transfer pricing - Computation of arm's length price [Safe harbour rules] - Assessment year 2008-09 - Assessee had incurred certain expenses on behalf of its AE - As said expenses were to be reimbursed to assesee

DCIT Cir 5(3)(2), Mumbai vs. The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee (ITA number 1597/M/2018) is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2077/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhary , Jm & & The Great Eastern Shipping Co. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income-Tax, Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Range-5(3), Esplanade House, 2 Nd Floor, Vs. Room No.525B, 5 Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact1565C The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Tax, Ltd. Range-5(3), Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Vs. Esplanade House, 2 Nd Floor, Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Fort, Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Jeet Kamdar , Shri Falee HFor Respondent: Shri
Section 115Section 14Section 143Section 144C

revenue authorities of international transaction every year would go for a toss. Further the decision of honourable Bombay High Court will become a safe harbour judicial precedent with respect to the arm‟slength price of corporate guarantee issued by one corporate entity of MNE to other, irrespective of their creditworthiness

The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 5(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee (ITA number 1597/M/2018) is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1597/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Narfendrakumar Choudhary , Jm & & The Great Eastern Shipping Co. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income-Tax, Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Range-5(3), Esplanade House, 2 N D Floor, Vs. Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact1565C The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Tax, Ltd. Range-5(3), Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Vs. Esplanade House, 2 N D Floor, Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Fort, Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Jeet Kamdar , Shri Falee HFor Respondent: Shri
Section 115Section 14Section 143Section 144C

revenue authorities of international transaction every year would go for a toss. Further the decision of honourable Bombay High Court will become a safe harbour judicial precedent with respect to the arm‟slength price of corporate guarantee issued by one corporate entity of MNE to other, irrespective of their creditworthiness

The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 5(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee (ITA number 1597/M/2018) is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 374/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Narfendrakumar Choudhary , Jm & & The Great Eastern Shipping Co. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income-Tax, Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Range-5(3), Esplanade House, 2 N D Floor, Vs. Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact1565C The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Tax, Ltd. Range-5(3), Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Vs. Esplanade House, 2 N D Floor, Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Fort, Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Jeet Kamdar , Shri Falee HFor Respondent: Shri
Section 115Section 14Section 143Section 144C

revenue authorities of international transaction every year would go for a toss. Further the decision of honourable Bombay High Court will become a safe harbour judicial precedent with respect to the arm‟slength price of corporate guarantee issued by one corporate entity of MNE to other, irrespective of their creditworthiness

DCIT 5(3)(2), Mumbai vs. The Great Eastern Shipping Co.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 3272/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm The Great Eastern Shipping Co. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income-Tax, Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Range-5(3), Esplanade House, 2 Nd Floor, Vs. Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact1565C The Dy. Commissioner Of The Great Eastern Shipping Income-Tax, Co. Ltd. Range-5(3), Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Vs. Esplanade House, 2 Nd Floor, Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Fort, Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14A

revenue authorities of international transaction every year would go for a toss. Further the decision of honourable Bombay High Court will become a safe harbour judicial precedent with respect to the arm‟s- length price of corporate guarantee issued by one corporate entity of MNE to other, irrespective of their

The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 5(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee (ITA number 1597/M/2018) is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1216/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Narfendrakumar Choudhary , Jm & & The Great Eastern Shipping Co. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income-Tax, Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Range-5(3), Esplanade House, 2 N D Floor, Vs. Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact1565C The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Tax, Ltd. Range-5(3), Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Vs. Esplanade House, 2 N D Floor, Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Fort, Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Jeet Kamdar , Shri Falee HFor Respondent: Shri
Section 115Section 14Section 143Section 144C

revenue authorities of international transaction every year would go for a toss. Further the decision of honourable Bombay High Court will become a safe harbour judicial precedent with respect to the arm‟slength price of corporate guarantee issued by one corporate entity of MNE to other, irrespective of their creditworthiness

The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 1656/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm The Great Eastern Shipping Co. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income-Tax, Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Range-5(3), Esplanade House, 2 Nd Floor, Vs. Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact1565C The Dy. Commissioner Of The Great Eastern Shipping Income-Tax, Co. Ltd. Range-5(3), Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Vs. Esplanade House, 2 Nd Floor, Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Fort, Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14A

revenue authorities of international transaction every year would go for a toss. Further the decision of honourable Bombay High Court will become a safe harbour judicial precedent with respect to the arm‟s- length price of corporate guarantee issued by one corporate entity of MNE to other, irrespective of their

Mondelez India Foods P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 5(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1518/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 234ASection 234C

section 92C(1) - Held, yes [Para 66] II. Section 92C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Transfer pricing - Computation of arm's length price [Safe harbour rules] - Assessment year 2008-09 - Assessee had incurred certain expenses on behalf of its AE - As said expenses were to be reimbursed to assesee

Mondelez India Foods P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 5(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1240/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 234ASection 234C

section 92C(1) - Held, yes [Para 66] II. Section 92C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Transfer pricing - Computation of arm's length price [Safe harbour rules] - Assessment year 2008-09 - Assessee had incurred certain expenses on behalf of its AE - As said expenses were to be reimbursed to assesee

Amsons Steel Pvt Ltd., Thane vs. DCIT Cir-6(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 970/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.970/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Amsons Steel Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Circle-6(1)(1) Plot No. A/16, Wagle Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Vs. Industrial Estate, Road Road, Mumbai-400020. No.8, Thane-400604. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaca4716G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Shashi Bekal Revenue By: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax/Nfac, Delhi Dated 06.02.2023 For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Of The Assessee Are As Under: - “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well In Law The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Not Considering Fair Market Value Of The Properties As On 30.05.2013 Determined By The District Valuation Officer-1, It Deptt, Mumbai-12 Vide His Report Dated 21.02.2019 As Against Stamp Duty Value Adopted By Learned Assessing Officer Even Through Your Appellant Sold At Prevailing Market Rate At Arm’S Length Principle. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well In Law The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Not Giving The Benefit Of Curative Amendment Inserted In Section 43 Ca By Finance Act, 2018 W.E.F. 01.04.2019 & Subsequently Finance Act, 2020 W.E.F.

For Appellant: Shri Shashi BekalFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 43Section 43C

Government, even though the initial tolerance band level was taken at 5%, in response to the representations by the stakeholders, this tolerance band, or safe harbour provision, was increased to 10%. There is no particular reason to justify any particular timeframe for implementing this enhancement of tolerance band or safe

Bhargav Bharatbhai Pandya, Surat vs. Income Tax Office, Ward 2(1)(3), Surat

In the result, ground No

ITA 354/SRT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Bhargav Bharatbhai Pandya, I.T.O., 61, Shubham Row House, Near Ward-2(1)(3), Vs. Sarasswati School, Honey Park Surat. Road, Adajan, Surat-395009. Pan No. Bcwpp 1537 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 254(1)Section 56(2)(x)Section 68

find that the Division Bench while giving such finding has considered the explanatory notes of Finance Act, 2020 with regard to increase of safe harbour limit of 5% under Section 43CA, 50C and 56 of the Act to 10%, thus, in our considered view, the ratio of this decision

Sara Logistics Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 97/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Ms. Arti N. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Samuel Pitta
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

computed PLI at 30.7% and contended that since the profit margin of the Appellant is more than the rate of 20% specified in Safe Harbour Rules, no transfer pricing adjustment could be made. We reject the aforesaid contention of the Appellant. The reliance on the Safe Harbour Rules

Smt. Mumtajbanu A. Jivani, Amreli vs. The ITO, Ward-3 (1) (4), Amreli

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 284/RJT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 250Section 269USection 50CSection 56(2)(vii)

relied on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the ITAT in the case of Amrapali Cinema (supra) for the proposition that the safe harbour of 10% difference in valuation and purchase price provided in section 50C of the Act is applicable retrospectively. No decision being cited

Shri. Bhupendra Sitapchand Zaveri, Mumbai vs. ITO, It, Ward- 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the present appeal preferred by the Assessee is 10

ITA 2052/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2023AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri. Ketan VajaniFor Respondent: Shri. Anil Sant
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 50C

accepted and as held by Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Maria Fernandes Cheryl v. ITO, it is presumed that the safe harbour of 10% would be available right from the time when section 50C was inserted in the Act i.e. April 4 Assessment Year

Jsw Steels Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 8(3), Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5459/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2009-10
Section 14A

average spread of 2.19% to assessee's cost of borrowing i.e. 7.59%, cost of domestic borrowings was worked out to be 9.78%. Relying upon safe harbour rules, Prime Lending Rate was worked out to be 12.75%. The ALP based on Indian Corporate Bond Rates was worked

Jsw Steels Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 8(3), Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5458/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2011-12
Section 14A

average spread of 2.19% to assessee's cost of borrowing i.e. 7.59%, cost of domestic borrowings was worked out to be 9.78%. Relying upon safe harbour rules, Prime Lending Rate was worked out to be 12.75%. The ALP based on Indian Corporate Bond Rates was worked

Jsw Steels Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 8(3), Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5457/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2010-11
Section 14A

average spread of 2.19% to assessee's cost of borrowing i.e. 7.59%, cost of domestic borrowings was worked out to be 9.78%. Relying upon safe harbour rules, Prime Lending Rate was worked out to be 12.75%. The ALP based on Indian Corporate Bond Rates was worked