COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. BENETTON INDIA PVT. LTD.

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Transfer Pricing Documentation, which has been relied upon by the TPO, are as follows: “During FY 2006-07, Benetton India assisted Benind SPA in acquiring garments and other finished products from third party vendors in India. With respect to the above mentioned transaction, Benetton Indians role was limited to procuring and sourcing of merchandise for its AE and. for this

DCM SHRIRAM LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI

Price and no adjustment\nwas proposed on these transactions. With respect to specified\ndomestic transactions, the TPO observed that the deduction\nclaimed under section 80IA of the Act on the profits from power\ngeneration units needs to be reduced and observed that the transfer\nof electricity generated by power generating units to other\nmanufacturing units

DCM SHRIRAM LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

Price and no adjustment\nwas proposed on these transactions. With respect to specified\ndomestic transactions, the TPO observed that the deduction\nclaimed under section 80IA of the Act on the profits from power\ngeneration units needs to be reduced and observed that the transfer\nof electricity generated by power generating units to other\nmanufacturing units

DCM SHRIIRAM LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, NEW DELHI

Price and no adjustment\nwas proposed on these transactions. With respect to specified\ndomestic transactions, the TPO observed that the deduction\nclaimed under section 80IA of the Act on the profits from power\ngeneration units needs to be reduced and observed that the transfer\nof electricity generated by power generating units to other\nmanufacturing units

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. DCM SHRIRAM LTD, NEW DELHI

Price and no adjustment\nwas proposed on these transactions. With respect to specified\ndomestic transactions, the TPO observed that the deduction\nclaimed under section 80IA of the Act on the profits from power\ngeneration units needs to be reduced and observed that the transfer\nof electricity generated by power generating units to other\nmanufacturing units

REEBOK INDIA CO.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Smt. Diva Singhassessment Year : 2008-2009

Section 92(3) does not bar or prohibit set off. (xiii) CP Method is a recognized and accepted method under Indian transfer pricing regulation. It can be applied by the Assessing Officer/TPO in case AMP expenses are treated as a separate international transaction, provided CP Method is the most appropriate and reliable method. Adoption of CP Method and computation

M/S. BG EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. JCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2011-12 Bg Exploration & Production India Jcit (International Taxation), Ltd., Dehradun. Lake Boulevard Road, Vs. Hiranandani Business Park, Powai, Mumbai.

Transfer Pricing Officer with a direction to examine the computation of ALP by the Assessee of above transaction strictly in accordance with the provisions of section 92C of the Income Tax Act considering the evidences placed by the Assessee before him and then decide the issue of adjustment, if any, on merits. Needless to say that Assessee may be given

IDEMIA SYSCOM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NOIDA vs. CIT(TP), DELHI-2, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

transfer pricing method, subject to the principles in Chapter II.” 20. The assessee is a Contract Manufacturer of SIM Card and Smart Card for IDFEMIA Syscom group and it is not in dispute that the assessee is a manufacturer. In our considered opinion, any difference in nomenclature will not change the picture. 21. Vide notice dated

HEWITT ASSOCIATES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year : 2007-08

transfer pricing assessment, the Ld. TPO sought information from VMF Softech Limited under section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”). The Ld. TPO by referring to the response received from VMF Softech Limited excluded this company from the list of final set of comparable companies on the ground that this company is predominantly engaged in outsourcing

SRF LIMITED ,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

prices at which power was purchased from respective State Electricity Board. 64. In a case where the assessee operates a Wind Power Mill (WPP) unit at Tamil Nadu to generate electricity primarily for consumption by its manufacturing units. During the year, the assessee had transferred the WPP units at effective rate of Rs. 6.35 p.u, based on fact that Tamil

SRF LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

prices at which power was purchased from respective State Electricity Board. 64. In a case where the assessee operates a Wind Power Mill (WPP) unit at Tamil Nadu to generate electricity primarily for consumption by its manufacturing units. During the year, the assessee had transferred the WPP units at effective rate of Rs. 6.35 p.u, based on fact that Tamil

SRF LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT / DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 10(1), NEW DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

prices at which power was purchased from respective State Electricity Board. 64. In a case where the assessee operates a Wind Power Mill (WPP) unit at Tamil Nadu to generate electricity primarily for consumption by its manufacturing units. During the year, the assessee had transferred the WPP units at effective rate of Rs. 6.35 p.u, based on fact that Tamil

GATES INDIA PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Section 37 of the Act. The jurisdiction vested under transfer pricing provisions to the TPO is only to find out whether the prices paid by the I.T.A. No.2379/Del/2022 22 services are at Arm’s Length Price or not, as held in Sony Ericson Mobile Communication vs. CIT, 374 ITR 118; CIT vs. EKL Appliances

SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer pricing adjustment simply on the ground that assessee has spent advertisement, marketing expenditure which is benefitting the brand/trademark of the AE would not be correct approach. Thus, this line of reasoning given by the TPO is rejected.” 49. In PepsiCo (supra), this Tribunal, while examining the AMP issue examined the implications of the recent developments in transfer pricing spearheaded

SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer pricing adjustment simply on the ground that assessee has spent advertisement, marketing expenditure which is benefitting the brand/trademark of the AE would not be correct approach. Thus, this line of reasoning given by the TPO is rejected.” 49. In PepsiCo (supra), this Tribunal, while examining the AMP issue examined the implications of the recent developments in transfer pricing spearheaded

SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer pricing adjustment simply on the ground that assessee has spent advertisement, marketing expenditure which is benefitting the brand/trademark of the AE would not be correct approach. Thus, this line of reasoning given by the TPO is rejected.” 49. In PepsiCo (supra), this Tribunal, while examining the AMP issue examined the implications of the recent developments in transfer pricing spearheaded

SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer pricing adjustment simply on the ground that assessee has spent advertisement, marketing expenditure which is benefitting the brand/trademark of the AE would not be correct approach. Thus, this line of reasoning given by the TPO is rejected.” 49. In PepsiCo (supra), this Tribunal, while examining the AMP issue examined the implications of the recent developments in transfer pricing spearheaded

SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer pricing adjustment simply on the ground that assessee has spent advertisement, marketing expenditure which is benefitting the brand/trademark of the AE would not be correct approach. Thus, this line of reasoning given by the TPO is rejected.” 49. In PepsiCo (supra), this Tribunal, while examining the AMP issue examined the implications of the recent developments in transfer pricing spearheaded