LI & FUNG INDIA PVT LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed and the order dated 25/11/11 of the ITAT Tribunal, Delhi Branch

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

3) of section 92D. If any one of such circumstances exists, the Assessing officer may reject the price adopted by the assessee and determine the Arms length Price in accordance with the same rules.” 48. The TPO after taking into account all relevant facts and data available to him has to determine arm‟s length price and pass a speaking

CIT vs. CUSHMAN AND WAKEFIELD INDIA PVT LTD

The appeal is partly allowed

92D and after considering such evidence as the Transfer Pricing Officer may require on any specified points and after taking into account all relevant materials which he has gathered, the Transfer Pricing Officer shall, by order in writing, determine the arm’s length price in relation to the international transaction in accordance with sub-section (3

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BBC WORLD INDIA (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee and the learned assessing officer are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Transfer Pricing Officer’ means a Joint Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner , authorised by the board to perform all or any of the functions of an ‘Assessing Officer’ specified in section 92C and 92D in respect of any person or class of persons. Thus the assessee stated that only 3

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishinew Delhi Television Ltd, Vs. Acit, 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase- Circle-13(1), Iii, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. New Delhi Television Ltd, Circle-13(1), 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent)

3 shall exercise such powers and perform such function of Transfer Pricing Officers as mentioned in Section 92CA for the purpose of sections 92C and 92D

M/S. NEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishinew Delhi Television Ltd, Vs. Acit, 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase- Circle-13(1), Iii, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. New Delhi Television Ltd, Circle-13(1), 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent)

3 shall exercise such powers and perform such function of Transfer Pricing Officers as mentioned in Section 92CA for the purpose of sections 92C and 92D

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MENTOR GRAPHICS (NOIDA) PVT.LTD

The appeal is allowed

92D and after considering such evidence as the Transfer Pricing Officer may require on any specified points and after taking into account all relevant materials which he has gathered, the Transfer Pricing Officer shall, by order in writing, determine the arm's length price in relation to the international transaction [or specified domestic transaction] in accordance with sub-section (3

PCIT-1, NEW DELHI vs. BEAM GLOBAL SPIRITS & WINE (INDIA) PVT. LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

3 Provision of Marketing Support services 10782778 TNMM 4 Re-imbursement of Expenses 19067033 No 5 Recovery of expenses 721078 No bench marking 4. The Tribunal records that although the TPO did not interfere with the benchmarking in respect of transactions listed at S. No. 1, 4 and 5, it came to the conclusion that the assessee had incurred

PCIT-1, NEW DELHI vs. BEAM GLOBAL SPIRITS & WINE (INDIA)PVT.LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

3 Provision of Marketing Support services 10782778 TNMM 4 Re-imbursement of Expenses 19067033 No 5 Recovery of expenses 721078 No bench marking 4. The Tribunal records that although the TPO did not interfere with the benchmarking in respect of transactions listed at S. No. 1, 4 and 5, it came to the conclusion that the assessee had incurred

(Now known as Sony India Limited)

3) to Section 92D. (See judgment dated 16th December, 2013 in ITA No. 306/2012 titled Li & Fung India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax of the Delhi High Court). Five Methods 65. Comparable Uncontrolled Price Method (‗CUP Method‘, for short) compares price charged for the property or service in a controlled transaction with the price charged for comparable property

NOBLE RESOURCE & TRADING INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed with above direction

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Transfer Pricing Officer (hereinafter referred to as 'the TPO') adopted Comparable Uncontrolled Prices (CUP) method. In the process, the assessee had presented two sets of prices claiming them to be comparable. One set of transactions relied on by the assessee was supplied by Noble Resources & Training India Pvt. Ltd Vs.DCIT, ITA No. 1827 & 1847/Del/2015 (Assessment Year

NOBLE RESOURCES & TRADING INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed with above direction

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Transfer Pricing Officer (hereinafter referred to as 'the TPO') adopted Comparable Uncontrolled Prices (CUP) method. In the process, the assessee had presented two sets of prices claiming them to be comparable. One set of transactions relied on by the assessee was supplied by Noble Resources & Training India Pvt. Ltd Vs.DCIT, ITA No. 1827 & 1847/Del/2015 (Assessment Year

M/S ATOTECH INDIA LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ACIT, GURGAON

In the result ground No. 1 of the appeal of the assessee with respect to the above issue is allowed with above direction

Bench: I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishi & Atotech India Ltd, Acit, 66, Km Stone, Nh-8, Gurgaon Circle, Vs. Delhi Jaipur Highway, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan:Aaccm0338G (Appellant) (Respondent)

3 ) of the act on 27. 12 2008 determining the total income of Rs. 62273895/– against the loss return of Rs. 26825833/- filed by the assessee incorporating the adjustment proposed by the Ld. transfer pricing officer of Rs. 89099728./-. 9. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. assessing officer the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A), Rohtak

LIUGONG INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

3), in rejecting the Transfer Pricing ("TP") Documentation maintained by the Appellant under section 92D of the Act read with

JINDAL STAINLESS LTD.,HISAR vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

3% USD 60 JSL Tube Black coil 0.70% USD 60 Adjustment because of difference in Nickel content has been made with reference to prices prevailing in London Metal Exchange (LME) on the respective dates. Accordingly, prices of international transactions of export of various grades of Stainless Steel products were compared with prices of comparable uncontrolled transactions of export to unrelated

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S JSL LTD.,, HISAR

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

3% USD 60 JSL Tube Black coil 0.70% USD 60 Adjustment because of difference in Nickel content has been made with reference to prices prevailing in London Metal Exchange (LME) on the respective dates. Accordingly, prices of international transactions of export of various grades of Stainless Steel products were compared with prices of comparable uncontrolled transactions of export to unrelated

RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, we direct the AO to reduce the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act by the amount of reversal of the provision of Rs

Bench: Sh. I. C.Sudhir Judicialmember & Sh. Prashant Maharishia.Y.: - 2008-09 Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs Acit 12Th Floor, Devika Tower, Range -15 6, Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacr0127N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Transfer Pricing (‗TP‘) documentation maintained by it in terms of section 92D of the Act read with Rule 10D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (‗Rules‘); not accepting the overseas Associated Enterprises (‗AEs‘) 2.2 ITA 196 Del 2013 Ranbaxy Laboratories limited V ACIT A.Y. 2008-09 Page 3

AMADEUS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA NO. 7691/Del/2017 stands allowed

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

3. Decision rendered by Hon’ble ITAT in AY 09-10 has been upheld by Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 26.04.2017 in ITA No. 154/2017….copy enclosed at pages 515-516. 4. The above decisions have thereafter also been followed by Hon’ble ITAT in case of ‘A’ for AY 2010-11 in ITA No. 1835/Del/2015 vide order

AMADEUS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA NO. 7691/Del/2017 stands allowed

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

3. Decision rendered by Hon’ble ITAT in AY 09-10 has been upheld by Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 26.04.2017 in ITA No. 154/2017….copy enclosed at pages 515-516. 4. The above decisions have thereafter also been followed by Hon’ble ITAT in case of ‘A’ for AY 2010-11 in ITA No. 1835/Del/2015 vide order