(Now known as Sony India Limited)

transfer pricing report, the assessed had declared net profit margin of 2.5% which was better than the average or mean of 18 comparables (wrongly mentioned as 19). The assessee had applied the TNM Method for computing the arm‘s length price and the Profit Level Indicator (‗PLI‘, for short) adopted was total turnover, in proportion to the net profit rate

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

TP), on applicability of CUP Method, the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal held as under: "Whether we proceed on the basis that (here is an order of preference in which transfer pricing

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)

methodical benchmarking process carried out by the appellant in the Transfer Pricing (‗TP‘) documentation maintained by it in terms of section

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. AMADEUS INDIA PVT LTD

Appeal is dismissed

TP report. 1.2 The above facts have not been disputed by the department (kindly refer submissions filed by the Ld. CIT (DR) relevant at page 2, last para). However in the same paragraph it is noted by the Ld. CIT (DR) that “the Transfer Pricing Officer noticed that expenditure in respect of AMP expenses incurred by the assessee were also

DCM SHRIIRAM LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 3 , NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of assessee is partly allowed

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

transfer pricing adjustment was challenged before the learned dispute resolution panel it gave the following directions:- Page 22 of 55 “2.2.5 We have considered the submissions of the assessee and the TP order. We also considered the judgment relied upon by the assessee. The various judgments referred to by the assessee have held that in terms of provisions of subsection

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

method has been accepted by the transfer-pricing officer and there is no dispute with respect to the comparables chosen by the appellant. The fact shows that for the purpose of working out the cost base for determination of the arm’s-length price in case of marketing support services, expenses of INR 2 3691597/– on sales promotion and expense

MCKINSEY KNOWLEDGE CENTRE INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 14 of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishimckinsey Knowledge Centre India Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Ltd, Circle-16(2) 3Rd Floor, Block-Iii, Vatika Business Park, New Delhi Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon Pan:Aaccm2356G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Transfer Pricing ("TP") documentation; and b. Determining the arm's length margins / prices using data pertaining only to financial Year ("FY") 2011 -12 which was not available to the Appellant at the time of complying with the Indian TP documentation requirements 6. The learned TPO / AO / DRP have erred in rejecting certain comparable companies selected by the Appellant in respect

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

method becomes less reliable substitute for arm's length dealings if not all significant characteristics of the uncontrolled transactions are comparable. Therefore, it would be ITA No 4249 / Del/2012, 4110/Del/2013 & 6337/Del/2013 A Y 2007-08 and 2008-09 Jindal Steel Limited Vs ACIT Cen Circle 4(1) , New Delhi appreciated that, if significant differences, CUP method will not produce

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

method becomes less reliable substitute for arm's length dealings if not all significant characteristics of the uncontrolled transactions are comparable. Therefore, it would be ITA No 4249 / Del/2012, 4110/Del/2013 & 6337/Del/2013 A Y 2007-08 and 2008-09 Jindal Steel Limited Vs ACIT Cen Circle 4(1) , New Delhi appreciated that, if significant differences, CUP method will not produce

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)

method chosen by the assessee and the choice of the profit level indicator. On a fresh search conducted by the Ld. transfer pricing officer 3 companies were selected from the database as comparables out of which it rejected the 2 companies and therefore only one company namely Grover and well India Page 4 of 15 Ltd remained as a comparable

M/S. BG EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. JCIT, DEHRADUN

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishibg Exploration & Production Jcit, India Ltd, International Taxation, Bg House, Dehradun Vs. Lake Boulevard Road, Hiranandani Business Park, Powai, Mumbai Pan:Aaace4569K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Bg Exploration & Production International Taxation, India Ltd, Bg House, Lake Dehradun Boulevard Road, Hiranandani Vs. Business Park, Powai, Mumbai Pan: Aaace4569K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Price (CUP) method was the most appropriate method in this case and that the ALP as determined by the economic analysis conducted by the Assessee was inappropriate as: i) The Assessee has not been able to establish as how these transactions are intrinsically linked with the other international transactions undertaken by the Assessee (e.g. payment on interest on loan, sale

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NOBLE RESOURCE AND TRADING INDIA PVT. LTD,, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Noble Resources & Trading India Pvt. Ltd., 1A-D, Circle-13(1), Room No. 406, Vandana Building, Vs. C.R. Building, Ip Estate, 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaaca0443N (Appellant) (Respondent) Noble Resources & Trading India Pvt. Acit (Osd), Ltd., 1A-D, Vandana Building, Cit-V, Vs. 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaaca0443N (Appellant) (Respondent) Noble Resources & Trading India Pvt. Ito, Ltd., 1A-D, Vandana Building, Ward-13(3), Vs. 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi C.R. Building, Pan:Aaaca0443N New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

price u/s 92CA(3) in respect of these international transactions. The ld TPO rejected the CUP method as most appropriate method adopted by the assessee and considered TNMM as the most appropriate method for benchmarking international transactions. The ld TPO also took PBT/ sales as the PLI which is (-) 13.73% in case of the assessee. Ld TPO selected 17 comparables

NOBLE RESOURCES & TRADING INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (OSD), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Noble Resources & Trading India Pvt. Ltd., 1A-D, Circle-13(1), Room No. 406, Vandana Building, Vs. C.R. Building, Ip Estate, 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaaca0443N (Appellant) (Respondent) Noble Resources & Trading India Pvt. Acit (Osd), Ltd., 1A-D, Vandana Building, Cit-V, Vs. 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaaca0443N (Appellant) (Respondent) Noble Resources & Trading India Pvt. Ito, Ltd., 1A-D, Vandana Building, Ward-13(3), Vs. 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi C.R. Building, Pan:Aaaca0443N New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

price u/s 92CA(3) in respect of these international transactions. The ld TPO rejected the CUP method as most appropriate method adopted by the assessee and considered TNMM as the most appropriate method for benchmarking international transactions. The ld TPO also took PBT/ sales as the PLI which is (-) 13.73% in case of the assessee. Ld TPO selected 17 comparables

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

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Noble Resources & Trading India Pvt. Ltd., 1A-D, Circle-13(1), Room No. 406, Vandana Building, Vs. C.R. Building, Ip Estate, 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaaca0443N (Appellant) (Respondent) Noble Resources & Trading India Pvt. Acit (Osd), Ltd., 1A-D, Vandana Building, Cit-V, Vs. 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaaca0443N (Appellant) (Respondent) Noble Resources & Trading India Pvt. Ito, Ltd., 1A-D, Vandana Building, Ward-13(3), Vs. 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi C.R. Building, Pan:Aaaca0443N New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

price u/s 92CA(3) in respect of these international transactions. The ld TPO rejected the CUP method as most appropriate method adopted by the assessee and considered TNMM as the most appropriate method for benchmarking international transactions. The ld TPO also took PBT/ sales as the PLI which is (-) 13.73% in case of the assessee. Ld TPO selected 17 comparables

GOODYEAR INDIA LTD.,,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

method. S.92C (1) thus is explicit that the only manner of effecting a TP adjustment is to substitute the transaction price with the ALP so determined. The second proviso to Section 92C (2) provides a 'gateway' by stipulating that if the variation between the ALP and the transaction price does not exceed the specified percentage, no TP adjustment

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

Transfer Pricing (TP) Study, the assessee has declared the following international transactions with its deemed AE: 9 Stay No. 475, 476/d/2018& ITA no. 1662/d/2016 (Amadeus India P. Ltd.) Nature of Transaction Method

AMADEUS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 2(2), NEW DELHI

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

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

Transfer Pricing (TP) Study, the assessee has declared the following international transactions with its deemed AE: 9 Stay No. 475, 476/d/2018& ITA no. 1662/d/2016 (Amadeus India P. Ltd.) Nature of Transaction Method

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

Transfer Pricing (TP) Study, the assessee has declared the following international transactions with its deemed AE: 9 Stay No. 475, 476/d/2018& ITA no. 1662/d/2016 (Amadeus India P. Ltd.) Nature of Transaction Method