TUPPERWARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-25(1) , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2018-19 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

Transfer Pricing Officer- 3(2)(1) ("Ld. TPO") have erred in proposing an addition of INR 928,242,653 holding that the Appellant's international transactions do not satisfy the arm's length principle envisaged under the Act. 5. That the Ld. DRP/Ld. AO/ Ld. TPO have erred in undertaking adjustment on account of Advertisement, Marketing and Promotion ("AMP") expenses

NALWA STEEL POWER LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 17(2), NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

section 92D of the Act read with Rule 10D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 ('the Rules') and proceeded to make the transfer pricing addition based on redetermination of the arm's length price of the domestic transaction towards transfer of 3 power. by using single year of financial data (i.e. data for FY 2012-13 only) (iii) as against

AMADEUS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. Vijay Pal Rao & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-2, New Delhi M/S. Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., E- 9, Connaught House, Connaught Place, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca0364L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Respondent By Sh. H.S. Choudhary, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03.08.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 23.10.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.:

Section 928 of the Act. The problem does not stop here. Even if a transaction involving an AMP spend for a foreign AE is able to be located in some agreement, written (for e.g., the sample agreements produced before the Court by the Revenue) or otherwise, how should a Transfer Pricing

NOKIA INDIA PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-6, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Kul Bharat

transfer pricing adjustment on account of 'alleged excessive' Advertising, Marketing and Promotion ("AMP") expenses incurred by the appellant. The sub-grounds in this respect are as under: 5.1. The Ld. TPO / Ld. Assessing Officer/ Hon'ble DRP have erred in not accepting the arm's length analysis carried out by the appellant, for the NMP Sales segment as a whole

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:

transfer pricing proceedings, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the AO/TPO for deciding the issue afresh and in accordance with the law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. 28 Ground of appeal No.1 by the Revenue is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 42. Ground

SWATCH GROUP (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 22(2), C.R. BUILDING

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

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2021-22] Swatch Group (India) Private Deputy Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, 4Th Floor, Rectangle-I, Plot No. D- Vs Circle 22(2), 4, Saket District Centre, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, Delhi, New Delhi-110017. 110002. Pan- Aafcs7516R Assessee Revenue

Transfer Pricing Officer ("Ld. TPO")/ Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel ("DRP") have erred in enhancing the income of the Appellant by INR. 22,35,89,000/-in respect of the advertising and marketing ("AMP") expenditure incurred by the Appellant. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AMP adjustment made by the Ld. AO/Ld

DCM SHRIRAM LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Challa Nagemdra Prasad & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

transfer pricing adjustments proposed by Id. TPO and upheld by the Id. DRP, c) ₹5,44,84,880/-on account of corporate tax issue upheld by the Id. DRP. d) In considering incorrect amount of capital gains at 77,71,953/- against the capital loss reported by assessee in its ITR at 4,09,10,680/- 2. That the final

AYATNA REALTY PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(2), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalm/S Wrigley India Private Dcit, Limited Circle-27(2), 206, Okhla Industrial Vs. New Delhi. Estate, Phase Iii, New Delhi-110020 Pan-Aaacw1789P (Appellant) (Respondent) Joint Cit (Osd), M/S Wrigley India Private Circle-27(2), Limited, New Delhi Vs. 206, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase Iii, New Delhi-110020 Pan-Aaacw1789P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 92F(5) of the Act, if ITA No.1293 to1295/Del/2022 there is an arrangement, understanding or action in concert, whether or not such arrangement, is in action formal or in writing which shows to substantiate in a transaction between two AEs, transfer pricing provisions would apply, and the transaction would qualify as an international transaction. Further, in the instant case

AYATNA REALTY PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(2), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalm/S Wrigley India Private Dcit, Limited Circle-27(2), 206, Okhla Industrial Vs. New Delhi. Estate, Phase Iii, New Delhi-110020 Pan-Aaacw1789P (Appellant) (Respondent) Joint Cit (Osd), M/S Wrigley India Private Circle-27(2), Limited, New Delhi Vs. 206, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase Iii, New Delhi-110020 Pan-Aaacw1789P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 92F(5) of the Act, if ITA No.1293 to1295/Del/2022 there is an arrangement, understanding or action in concert, whether or not such arrangement, is in action formal or in writing which shows to substantiate in a transaction between two AEs, transfer pricing provisions would apply, and the transaction would qualify as an international transaction. Further, in the instant case

GREENLAND FINANCE AND LEASING P. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalm/S Wrigley India Private Dcit, Limited Circle-27(2), 206, Okhla Industrial Vs. New Delhi. Estate, Phase Iii, New Delhi-110020 Pan-Aaacw1789P (Appellant) (Respondent) Joint Cit (Osd), M/S Wrigley India Private Circle-27(2), Limited, New Delhi Vs. 206, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase Iii, New Delhi-110020 Pan-Aaacw1789P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 92F(5) of the Act, if ITA No.1293 to1295/Del/2022 there is an arrangement, understanding or action in concert, whether or not such arrangement, is in action formal or in writing which shows to substantiate in a transaction between two AEs, transfer pricing provisions would apply, and the transaction would qualify as an international transaction. Further, in the instant case

GREENLAND FINANCE AND LEASING P. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalm/S Wrigley India Private Dcit, Limited Circle-27(2), 206, Okhla Industrial Vs. New Delhi. Estate, Phase Iii, New Delhi-110020 Pan-Aaacw1789P (Appellant) (Respondent) Joint Cit (Osd), M/S Wrigley India Private Circle-27(2), Limited, New Delhi Vs. 206, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase Iii, New Delhi-110020 Pan-Aaacw1789P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 92F(5) of the Act, if ITA No.1293 to1295/Del/2022 there is an arrangement, understanding or action in concert, whether or not such arrangement, is in action formal or in writing which shows to substantiate in a transaction between two AEs, transfer pricing provisions would apply, and the transaction would qualify as an international transaction. Further, in the instant case

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S XANSA INDIA LTD., NOIDA

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer of a technical plan or technical design, but excludes any service that does not enable the person acquiring the service to apply the technology contained therein. 41. Therefore in both the above double taxation avoidance agreement the fees for technical services is chargeable to tax only if it satisfies the “ make available” test. On looking to the various expenditure

WRIGLEY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-27(2), DELHI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 92F(5) of the Act, if there is an arrangement, understanding or action in concert, whether or not such arrangement, is in action formal or in writing which shows to substantiate in a transaction between two AEs, transfer pricing provisions would apply, and the transaction would qualify as an international transaction. Further, in the instant case, there

JCIT, CIRCLE-27(2), NEW DELHI vs. WRIGLEY INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 92F(5) of the Act, if there is an arrangement, understanding or action in concert, whether or not such arrangement, is in action formal or in writing which shows to substantiate in a transaction between two AEs, transfer pricing provisions would apply, and the transaction would qualify as an international transaction. Further, in the instant case, there

DCIT, CIRCLE- 25(1), NEW DELHI vs. WRIGLEY INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 92F(5) of the Act, if 13 ITA Nos.667 & 702, 952 & 953/Del/2022 ITA No. 1293 to 1295/Del/2022 there is an arrangement, understanding or action in concert, whether or not such arrangement, is in action formal or in writing which shows to substantiate in a transaction between two AEs, transfer pricing provisions would apply, and the transaction would qualify

M/S. BACARDI INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

transfer pricing adjustment envisages the substitution of the price of such international transaction with the ALP. 37 Bacardi India Pvt. Ltd. 54. Under Sections 92B to 92F, the pre-requisite for commencing the TP exercise is to show the existence of an international transaction. The next step is to determine the price of such transaction. The third step would

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S MICROFOFT INDIA (R&D) PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year : 2011-12

section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) in relation to the assessment year 2011-12. 2. At the outset, it is relevant to mention that when the appeal of the assessee came up for hearing before the Tribunal on 05.06.2018, it raised an additional ground contending that the transfer pricing adjustments made

M/S NORTH SHORE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

928/-. The ld. Assessing Officer has noted the business of the assessee as given in the transfer pricing report and he has made transfer pricing adjustment of Rs.46,59,671/- by computing the Arm’s Length Price of international transaction, without even referring the matter to the Transfer Pricing Adjustment Officer as required under the law in terms of Section

SUMITOMO CORPORATION INDIA PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-22(2), DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above and the stay application is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accontant Member Assessment Year 2020-21 Sumitomo Corporation India Vs. Dcit Pvt. Ltd. Circle -22 (2) 501 & 502, 5Th Floor West Wing, World Mark 1, Asset No.11, Hospitality District Aerocity, New Delhi-110037 Pan No.Aabcs1887M Appellant Respondent It(Tp) Appeal No.14/Del/2025 Assessment Year 2021-22 Sumitomo Corporation India Vs. Dcit Pvt. Ltd. Circle -22 (2) 501 & 502, 5Th Floor Delhi West Wing, World Mark 1, Asset No.11, Hospitality District Aerocity, New Delhi-110037 Pan No.Aabcs1887M Appellant Respondent

transfer pricing matters. The Ld. AD/TPO, in the order, also mentioned that a detailed analysis on the comparables for non-BAPA transactions, was already made in the TP order dated 31 October 2023, (refer para 3 on internal page 5 of final assessment order/page 11 of the appeal set). 16. Aggrieved by the final assessment order, the Appellant