M/S STERIA NDIA LTD.,,NOIDA vs. ADDL CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer pricing officer Page 17 of 95 included by the learned assessing officer in the assessment order, therefore ground number 2 along with all its sub grounds are allowed as directed above. 31. Now coming to ground number 3 of the appeal which is against the disallowance of management services fees

STERIA INDIA LTD.,NOIDA vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAQL RANGE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer pricing officer Page 17 of 95 included by the learned assessing officer in the assessment order, therefore ground number 2 along with all its sub grounds are allowed as directed above. 31. Now coming to ground number 3 of the appeal which is against the disallowance of management services fees

STERIA (INDIA) LTD.,NOIDA vs. ADDL. CIT, SPL. RANGE- 8 , NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer pricing officer Page 17 of 95 included by the learned assessing officer in the assessment order, therefore ground number 2 along with all its sub grounds are allowed as directed above. 31. Now coming to ground number 3 of the appeal which is against the disallowance of management services fees

M/S CORNING SAS INDIA BRANCH OFFICE,GURGAON vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

transfer pricing legislation and relied upon the decision of LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.5140/Del/2011). 15. Ld. DRP while agreeing with the TPO that the payment for intra group services to AEs is separate international transactions independent of financial results and capable of verifiable separately on the following issues :- “In an uncontrolled environment any taxpayer for availing the services

CORNING SAS- INDIA BRANCH OFFICE,GURUGRAM vs. DDIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), GURGAON

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

transfer pricing legislation and relied upon the decision of LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.5140/Del/2011). 15. Ld. DRP while agreeing with the TPO that the payment for intra group services to AEs is separate international transactions independent of financial results and capable of verifiable separately on the following issues :- “In an uncontrolled environment any taxpayer for availing the services

CORNING SAS- INDIA BRANCH OFFICE,GURGAON vs. DDIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

transfer pricing legislation and relied upon the decision of LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.5140/Del/2011). 15. Ld. DRP while agreeing with the TPO that the payment for intra group services to AEs is separate international transactions independent of financial results and capable of verifiable separately on the following issues :- “In an uncontrolled environment any taxpayer for availing the services

HERO MOTO CORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, DELHI

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

price could not have been made under that section. Further, the Tribunal held that the transactions were entered by the appellant on account of commercial expediency and when the recipients had paid tax on payments received from the appellant company, disallowance could not be made by applying provisions of section 40A(2) of the Act. It would be pertinent

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

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 Review for the FY ended 31.03.2007 (pages 643-648, 653-654 of Paper Book). He further submitted that TNMM applied by the TPO which has been accepted by the assessee takes care of minor differences in functional profile etc. and hence this company be retained as a comparable company. 14.5 We have heard the Ld. Representatives of both

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S EXXON MOBIL LUBRICANTS P. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2004-05 Dcit, Vs. Exxon Mobil Lubricants P. Ltd., Circle-11(1), Ernst & Young Tower, New Delhi. B-26, Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi. Pan Aabce0207H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.D. Kapila, Advocate Shri R.R. Maurya, Advocate Revenue By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit- Dr Order Per R.K. Panda, Am:

239 Total 4. He noted that the transactions from sl. No.1-5 have been benchmarked in aggregated format using cost plus method with gross profit/direct and indirect cost of production as profit level indicator. The financial result of the assessee is tabulated in Appendix G with a finding of Gross Profit ratio at 38.29%. This margin has been compared with

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. 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

SANSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 8 , 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

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS LTD.,, GURGAON

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. 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. 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