← All Phrases

“arm's length price”

Transfer PricingSection 92Section 921,810 judgments

The decision most relied on for arm's length price is CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. (345 ITR 241), cited in 422 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on arm's length price

CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd.
345 ITR 241 · 2012 · High Court
422
citing judgments

Transfer pricing adjustments for outstanding receivables are permissible only if the Tax Officer establishes, through analysis over a period, a pattern indicating an international transaction intended to benefit an associated enterprise. The Tax Officer cannot question purely business decisions like royalty payments or exceed jurisdiction by applying cost-benefit analysis to determine the arm's length price of services.

CIT v. Everest Kento Cylinders Ltd.
378 ITR 57 · 2015 · High Court
304
citing judgments

Corporate guarantee fees are subject to transfer pricing rules, and adjustments may be needed to account for differences between corporate guarantees and more liquid bank guarantees when determining arm's length price.

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT
381 ITR 117 · 2016 · High Court
220
citing judgments

The Bright Line Test (BLT) is not a recognized method under the Income-tax Act and Rules for benchmarking advertising, marketing, and promotion (AMP) expenses or for determining the existence of an international transaction or its Arm's Length Price. The Revenue must first establish the existence and price of an international transaction before seeking an ALP adjustment.

Chryscapital Investment Advisors (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
376 ITR 183 · 2015 · High Court
170
citing judgments

For transfer pricing comparability analysis, companies should not be excluded solely based on higher turnover if they are otherwise functionally comparable, unless the turnover difference reflects fundamental functional dissimilarities, brand value, or risk profiles that materially impact profitability.

PCIT v. Redington (India) Ltd.
430 ITR 298 · 2021 · High Court
132
citing judgments

A corporate guarantee issued to Associated Enterprises (AEs) is an international transaction under Section 92B, requiring adjustments for guarantee commission due to inherent risk. The reasonable arm's length rate for benchmarking such corporate guarantees can be determined using internal or external comparable uncontrolled prices.

Bausch & Lomb Eye Care (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional CIT
381 ITR 227 · 2016 · High Court
127
citing judgments

The existence of an international transaction must be established before its arm's length price can be determined. An alleged 'excessive' AMP expenditure cannot unilaterally expand the scope of an international transaction if its existence is contested.

CIT v. Cushman & Wakefield (India) (P.) Ltd.
367 ITR 730 · 2014 · High Court
120
citing judgments

This case determines the Arm's Length Price (ALP) for intra-group services and reimbursements, clarifying when charges constitute services warranting a mark-up versus mere pass-through costs. It provides guidance on the circumstances under which an ALP adjustment, including an ALP of 'nil', is appropriate for such transactions.

CIT v. Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd.
56 Taxmann.com 206 · 2015 · High Court
119
citing judgments

When determining the arm's length price for interest on a foreign currency loan advanced to an Associated Enterprise, the Indian Prime Lending Rate is not applicable. Instead, the interest rate should be benchmarked based on the prevailing foreign currency rate, such as EURIBOR, or the rate in the country where the loan is received/consumed.

Judgments citing arm's length price

Dic Fine Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 11(1), Kolkata

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1966/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 153Section 69Section 69A

pricing study at entity level and instead accepting the two different PLI indicators adopted by the TPO for the purposes of computation of arm's length price of the international transactions. 3.6. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the TPO erred ... copy of an Advance Pricing Agreement (APA) entered into by the assessee with the CBDT (dated 24.03.2025). In terms of this APA, the Arm’s Length Price (ALP) has been agreed at 4.25% on entity level for AYs 2019- 20 to 2023-24. It was pointed out that the assessee

D S Trading, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1885/AHD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 271A

learned AO / Hon'ble DRP has erred in facts and circumstances of the case and in law, in re-computation of the arm's length price ('ALP') of the international transactions of exports entered by the Appellant, by proposing an upward adjustment ... wherein it was held as under:- I. Section 92C, read with section 92CA, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Transfer pricing - Computation of arm’s length price - Assessment year 2006-07 - Assessee-company was a wholly owned subsidiary of an American company and operated a design centre for its parent

Aon Consulting Private Limited, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissoner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated

ITA 4415/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 154Section 253

involved in this case, the Assessing Officer referred the matter to the learned Transfer Pricing Officer (in short TPO?) for computation of Arm’s Length Price (in short ‘ALP’ of the international transaction entered into with its AE. The learned TPO vide its order dated 21.07.2023 conducted TP study ... erred in proposing an adjustment of Rs. 3,360,180, to the income of the Appellant on account of alleged difference in the arm's length price of interest on outstanding receivables. In doing so, the Ld. AO/ Ld. TPO erred on the following: 13.1 That on the facts

Mcleod Russel India Limited, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-4(1), Kolkata

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 458/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jun 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: the due date of filing of return under Section 139(1) of the Act.

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

years under consideration. Ground No. 2 4. Ground No. 2 pertains to Corporate Guarantee Fee which has been determined at an Arm’s Length Price (ALP) at 1.82%, thus leading to an adjustment of Rs. 2,01,97,394/-. On this issue, the Ld. AR drew our attention to ITAT ... assessee has charged fees @0.5% on account of corporate guarantee provided by it, then such a fee would be considered at Arm's Length Price and no further adjustment is required to be made. The assessee by adopting this method has worked out the value of Arm's Length Price

Mecleod Russel India Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 4(1), Kolkata

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 454/KOL/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jun 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: the due date of filing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act.

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

years under consideration. Ground No. 2 4. Ground No. 2 pertains to Corporate Guarantee Fee which has been determined at an Arm’s Length Price (ALP) at 1.82%, thus leading to an adjustment of Rs. 2,01,97,394/-. On this issue, the Ld. AR drew our attention to ITAT ... assessee has charged fees @0.5% on account of corporate guarantee provided by it, then such a fee would be considered at Arm's Length Price and no further adjustment is required to be made. The assessee by adopting this method has worked out the value of Arm's Length Price

M/S Tega Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2597/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(5)Section 244ASection 92BSection 92CSection 92C(3)

pricing proceedings) are void-ab-initio as the conditions of section 92C(3) of the Act have not been satisfied. 2. Determination of arm's length price by the Ld. TPO, Ld. AO and Hon'ble DRP for Corporate guarantee commission received by the Appellant 2.1. That ... carried out the transfer pricing study and passed an order u/s 92CA(3) r.w.s. 144C(5) of the Act and computed the total Arm's Length Price adjustment at ₹ 24,79,701/- vide order passed u/s 92CA(3) of the Act dated 25.10.2023. The assessee filed an objection before

DCIT-2 1 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Iss Facility Services India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 2208/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR
Section 10(35)Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 14ASection 153Section 250

weighted average net cost plus margin of the comparable companies selected by the assessee, it was claimed that both international transactions are at arm's length price. 6. Pursuant to the reference by the Assessing Officer (“AO”) under section 92CA(1) of the Act to the Transfer Pricing Officer ... determination ITA No.2208/Mum/2025 & CO No.109/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2014-15) 5 of the arm's length price of the international transaction undertaken by the assessee, the TPO asked the assessee to provide brief description of the services, basis of cost allocation along with the allocation keys, evidence of benefit received

Siemens Aktiengesellschaft, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, grounds No

ITA 7779/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 271G

respect of the Indian AEs, orders have been passed by the Ld. TPO determining the payments made by them are higher than the arm's length price. Thus, accordingly, it had been submitted that it cannot be held that assessee had under charged albeit, Indian AE have over paid ... revelation. The Id. TPO was bound to determine the ALP in accordance with the Rules after analyzing the nature of transaction and the arm's length price after applying method provided under the Rules If in the case of the Indian AE, the same transaction has been benchmarked

Tata Cummins Private Limited, Pune vs. The DCIT Circle-1-Jamshedpur and the Assessment Unit, Income-Tax Department, NFAC, Delhi, Jamshedpur

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

ITA 430/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi12 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaytata Cummins Private Limited, D.C.I.T., Cummins India Office, Tower-A, 7Th Circle-1, Vs. Floor, Survey No. 21, Balewadi, Pune, Jamshedpur. Maharashtra. Pan No. Aaact 6353 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

panel-2, New Delhi (Dispute Resolution Panel), the TPO has treated the Research & Development (R&D) expenses incurred by the assessee as an Arm's Length Price (Arms Length Price) adjustment that was supposed to be done in regard to the transactions with the AEs of the assessee. The assessee ... transactions". The opening part of Section 92 says that "any income arising from an international transaction shall be computed having regard to the arm's length price". The expression 'income arising' postulates that the income has arisen under the substantive charging provisions of the Act. In other words% the income

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle 1 1, Chennai vs. Hitachi Solutions India Private Limited, Kanchipuram

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

ITA 1715/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND\nSHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nआयकर अपीलसं./IT(TP)A No.: 17/CHNY/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19\nHitachi Solutions India Private\nLimited,\nBlock 5, 10th Floor, 1/124,\nDLF IT Park, Shivaji Gardens,\nMount Poonamallee Road,\nChennai - 600 089.\nThe Deputy Commissioner of\nIncome Tax,\nVs. Corporate Circle- 1(1),\nNo.121, M.G.Road,\nChennai - 600 034.\n[PAN:AAACZ-1544-R]\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)\nआयकर

For Appellant: Shri Darpan Kirpalani, Advocate by VirtualFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, C.I.T
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

circumstances of the case. 2.2 The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts by making an upward adjustment to the arm's length price ("ALP") of the Appellant's international transactions with associated enterprises ("AEs"). 3. Transfer pricing grounds ... Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Transfer Pricing Officer, Corporate Circle - 2(1), Chennai (“Ld. Transfer Pricing Officer” or “TPO”) for determination of the arm's length price ("ALP") of the international transactions entered into by the assessee with its Associated Enterprise ("AE”) dated 01.03.2021. The TPO disregard the submissions filed

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 3(3), Chennai. vs. M/S. Caterpillar India Pvt. Ltd, Chennai

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 717/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./It(Tp)A No.: 42/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S.Caterpillar India Private Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of 7Th Floor, International Tech Park, Income Tax, Taramani Road, Vs. Central Circle- 3(3), Chennai – 600 113. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan:Aabcc-4615-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 717/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S.Caterpillar India Private Tax, Limited, 7Th Floor, International Tech Park, Central Circle- 3(3), V. Chennai – 600 034. Taramani Road, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan:Aabcc-4615-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Harish Ramanathan, C.A. By Virtual ""थ" की ओर से/Department By : Shri A. Sasikumar, C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Are Arising Out Of Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 92Ca (3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Dated 07.03.2023. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For :-2-: It(Tp) A. No:42 /Chny/2023 & The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeal Filed By The Revenue & Assessee Are Being Heard Together & Disposed Off, By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri Harish Ramanathan, C.A. by VirtualFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, C.I.T
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92D

applied Transaction Net Margin Method (TNMM) as the most appropriate method and basis that the assessee concluded that the international transactions at arm's length price (ALP) in arriving at the operating profit margins of the assessee. While computing the ALP the assessee made certain adjustments to its operating cost

Schindler India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income-Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 4819/MUM/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2020-21 Schindler India Private Limited, The Asst. Commissioner Of Schindler House, Income Tax, Main Street, Vs. Circle-15(3)(2) Hiranandani Gardens, Aayakar Bhavan, Powai, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai -400076 New Marine Lines, [Pan: Aaecs1548J] Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Chandani Shah a/wFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 270ASection 274Section 37(1)Section 92C

illegal, unsustainable and ought to be deleted, as the learned AO/Id. TPO has not applied any of the methods for determination of arm's length price as prescribed under section 92C of the Act, read with rule 10C of the rules being the most appropriate method. 1.6. On the facts ... further erred in upholding/ confirming the action of the learned AO/TPO in determining the arm's length price of the international transactions relating to Payment of License Fees/ Royalty, payment of management recharge cost and 3 payment of II support and SAP systems recharge at NII, without appreciating that

Schindler India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-Range 15(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 7311/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)

circumstances of the case and in law, the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO)/Dispute Resolution Panel ('DRP') erred in determining the Arm's Length Price (ALP) of transaction pertaining to payment of royalty to Inventio AG as Nil instead of INR 20,49,44,986 by: a. ignoring the transfer pricing

Schindler India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT-Cir-15(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 7326/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Chandani ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)

circumstances of the case and in law, the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO)/Dispute Resolution Panel ('DRP') erred in determining the Arm's Length Price (ALP) of transaction pertaining to payment of royalty to Inventio AG as Nil instead of INR 20,49,44.986 by: a. ignoring the transfer pricing documentation

Genpact Services Llc, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Taxation 1(3)(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 788/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2019-20]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

transactions and making further enquiries, passed the order dated January 21, 2022, under section 92CA(3) of the Act, wherein TPO accepted the arm's length price of the international transactions pertaining to provision and receipt of services related to provision and receipt of services. 4. However, the AO assumed

Pos-Hyundai Steel Manufacturing India Private Limited, Kanchipuram vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Taxof Income Tax Circle 1 Ltu, Chennai

In the result the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2485/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:2485/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Pos – Hyundai Steel Manufacturing Deputy Commissioner Of Income India Private Limited, Vs. Tax, F-70, Sipcot Industrial Park, Circle -1, Ltu, Irungattukottai S.O., Chennai. Kanchipuram – 602 117. [Pan:Aaacp-6484-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. B. Srinath, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, C.I.T
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

Ld.DRP has erred in law and in facts in disregarding the internal TNMM method for benchmarking the international transaction in arriving at the arm’s length price, which has been accepted in the previous and future years. 3. Rejection of VAE Filter and erroneous selection of additional comparable companies ... aside the order of the AO /TPO and remit this issue back to the file of the AO / TPO for determining the arm's length price in respect of the international transactions undertaken with the associated enterprise be determined by making internal comparison of profitability from the international transactions with

Lions Gate India LLP, Mumbai vs. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Delhi, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 4970/MUM/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jun 2025

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Ms. Bhumika Majethiya, AR (virtually)For Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. DR
Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 92CSection 92C(3)

Other Method, in accordance with the provisions of the Act read with Income Tax Rules, 1962 ('the Rules'), for determination of the arm's length price ('ALP') of international transaction of licensing of content rights for OTT business, without providing any cogent reasons for the same; Comparability analysis of uncontrolled ... Other Method and the benchmarking analysis carried out by the Appellant to identify comparable agreements for the purpose of ascertaining the arm's length price; 3 Lions Gate India LLP AY 2020-21 Ad-hoc benchmarking of the international transaction 10. erred in determining the ALP of the international transaction

Goldman Sachs (India) Securities Pvt.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 7 (1) (1), Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 8 and 9 are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2436/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh&Girish Agrawal(Physical Hearing) Goldman Sachs (India) Securities Acit, Circle-7(1)(1), Private Limited, 951-A, Rational House, Vs Aayakarbhawan, Mumbai- Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Prabhadevi, 400020. Mumbai-400025. [Pan No. Aafca6819F] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 254(1)Section 92C

making an upward transfer pricing adjustment to the extent of Rs 19,80,000 by re-computing the Arm's Length Price (ALP) of the international transaction pertaining to provision of non-binding investment advisory and support services (IA services) by the Appellant to its associated enterprises (AEs), inter alia ... services; 3. In making an upward transfer pricing adjustment to the extent of Rs 23,32,37,536 by re-computing the Arm's Length Price (ALP) of the international transaction pertaining to provision of Information Technology enabled Services (ITeS) by the Appellant to its associated enterprises (AEs), inter alia

M/S Vodafone Global Services P Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 1(1), Pune

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

ITA 660/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.660/Pun/2022 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Prakash L. Pathade
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 156Section 270Section 92C(2)Section 92D

course of Transfer Pricing (TP') Assessment proceedings. 10. The Assessee submits that the variation/reduction of 3 percent to be allowed while determining the arm's length price as envisaged under the proviso to Section 92C(2) of the Act. C. Initiation of penalty proceedings under section ... situation, we direct the learned Transfer Pricing Officer [in short “TPO”] to exclude all the instant six comparables and compute the assessee’s arm’s length price [in short “ALP’] adjustment accordingly.” 16. Going through the above decision of this Tribunal, we find merit in the contention of ld. Counsel

Troy Chemical India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. CIT (A), NFAC, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5933/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Tejveer SinghFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 9

made by the Assessing Officer (“AO”) under section 92CA(1) of the Act to the Transfer Pricing Officer (“TPO”) for determination of the Arm's Length Price (“ALP") of the international transactions undertaken by the assessee, the TPO issued notice to the assessee asking it to show cause ... international transaction of the assessee on account of purchase of finished goods and purchase return of goods. 8. In conformity with the Arm's Length Price so determined by the TPO, the AO passed the draft assessment order under section 144C(1) of the Act on 08.11.2023 computing the total