BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

44 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 172(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi425Mumbai417Karnataka254Bangalore133Cochin89Hyderabad89Chennai84Jaipur83Chandigarh73Ahmedabad57Calcutta54Indore48Kolkata44Raipur19Cuttack18Pune16Lucknow12Nagpur11Telangana11Rajkot9Surat7Ranchi6Agra6SC6Dehradun5Varanasi5Rajasthan3Jodhpur2Allahabad2Visakhapatnam1Andhra Pradesh1Guwahati1Kerala1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)44Addition to Income31Section 14A30Section 80I30Section 92C18Disallowance17Deduction17Transfer Pricing14Section 6812

M/S PHILIPS ELECTRONICS INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I,.T CIR - 11,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1894/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Feb 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 857/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S Philips India Limited -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Circle-12(2), (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcp 9487 A] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No. 1894/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S Philips India Limited -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Circle-12(2), (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcp 9487 A] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Arvind Sonde, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 10.01.2018. Date Of Pronouncement : 02.02.208. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 92Section 92C

section 92C(2) of the Act.” 38. We have heard the rival submissions. As in earlier A.Y.2007-08, the assessee seeks exclusion of three comparable companies out of the seven comparable companies ultimately chosen by the TPO in A.Y.2008-09. The three companies which are sought to be excluded by the assessee in this appeal before the Tribunal are Aftek

Showing 1–20 of 44 · Page 1 of 3

Section 143(2)11
TP Method11
Capital Gains9

PHILIPS ELECTRONIS INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 857/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 857/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S Philips India Limited -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Circle-12(2), (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcp 9487 A] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No. 1894/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S Philips India Limited -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Circle-12(2), (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcp 9487 A] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Arvind Sonde, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 10.01.2018. Date Of Pronouncement : 02.02.208. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 92Section 92C

section 92C(2) of the Act.” 38. We have heard the rival submissions. As in earlier A.Y.2007-08, the assessee seeks exclusion of three comparable companies out of the seven comparable companies ultimately chosen by the TPO in A.Y.2008-09. The three companies which are sought to be excluded by the assessee in this appeal before the Tribunal are Aftek

BOTHRA SHIPPING SERVICES(CURRENTLY KNOWN AS BOTHRA SHIPPING SERVICES (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CENTAL CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ground no. 11 & 12 are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 178/KOL/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Bothra Shipping Services ......…..…….……………………..…………………………………..……….……..Appellant (Currently Known As Bothra Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd.) Room No. 10 2Nd Floor “Sagar Estate 2 Clive Ghat Street Kolkata – 700 107 [Pan : Aadfb 8479 P] Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata.…….......….......Respondent Appearances By: Shri Naresh Jain & Mrs. Arati Debnath, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit, D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 26Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 31St , 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- All These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 144C R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The ‘Act’). As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 2. Brief Facts Of This Case Are Brought Out By The Ld. Drp At Page 1 Of His Order Which Is Extracted For Ready Reference:- Bothra India Is Engaged In The Business Of Handling Bulk Cargoes. Its Activities Include Vessel Handling, Stevedoring & Cargo Handling, Clearing & Forwarding & Other Port Related Activities. Jaldhi Overseas Pte Ltd ('Jaldhi Overseas') Engages Bothra India For Vessel Handling At The Port, To Provide Various Vessel Related Services Until The Vessel

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153ASection 153BSection 92CSection 92C(3)

section 92CA(4) & 144C(13) & 153A of the Act is bad in law and without appropriate jurisdiction. The Appellant therefore prays that the assessment order be set aside. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. AO /Ld. Panel /Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Transfer Pricing)-1 ('Ld. TPO') erred in making

DCIT, CC-3(3), KOLKATA vs. M/S ANKIT METAL & POWER LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1493/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 115JSection 92C(2)

transfer pricing adjustment by holding as follows: “The appellant had furnished comparative statements which showed that the weighted average price at which AE sold raw materials to unrelated parties was comparable with the price at which the raw material was sold to the appellant. The Ld. TPO did not dispute the application of internal CUP in the given facts

ACIT, CIRCLE - 10(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. VESUVIUS INDIA LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 206/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1333/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. CIT (DR)For Respondent: ShriSoumen Adak, FCA, Shri Aashish Podder, ACA &Shri Prashant
Section 143(3)Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Adjustment on the following grounds: a) The services provided by the AE of the assessee under the SA fall into the category of stewardship activity; b) Services provided by the AE of the assessee under the SA were general supervisory activities which assisted the AE to control the activities of the assessee; c) Payments made by the assessee

VESUVIUS INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1289/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1333/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. CIT (DR)For Respondent: ShriSoumen Adak, FCA, Shri Aashish Podder, ACA &Shri Prashant
Section 143(3)Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Adjustment on the following grounds: a) The services provided by the AE of the assessee under the SA fall into the category of stewardship activity; b) Services provided by the AE of the assessee under the SA were general supervisory activities which assisted the AE to control the activities of the assessee; c) Payments made by the assessee

ACIT, CIRCLE - 10(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. VESUVIUS INDIA LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 207/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1333/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. CIT (DR)For Respondent: ShriSoumen Adak, FCA, Shri Aashish Podder, ACA &Shri Prashant
Section 143(3)Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Adjustment on the following grounds: a) The services provided by the AE of the assessee under the SA fall into the category of stewardship activity; b) Services provided by the AE of the assessee under the SA were general supervisory activities which assisted the AE to control the activities of the assessee; c) Payments made by the assessee

ACIT, CIRCLE - 10(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. VESUVIUS INDIA LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1333/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1333/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. CIT (DR)For Respondent: ShriSoumen Adak, FCA, Shri Aashish Podder, ACA &Shri Prashant
Section 143(3)Section 92C

Transfer Pricing Adjustment on the following grounds: a) The services provided by the AE of the assessee under the SA fall into the category of stewardship activity; b) Services provided by the AE of the assessee under the SA were general supervisory activities which assisted the AE to control the activities of the assessee; c) Payments made by the assessee

PRAMOD LAKRA,DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PHILLIPS CARBON BLACK LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2457/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

4) power plants whose profits are eligible for deduction u/s 80- IA of the Act. During the relevant year, these power plants had generated and distributed power which was entirely consumed by the manufacturing unit of the assessee. Having regard to the provision of Sec. 801A(8), the electricity transferred from the power plants to the carbon black manufacturing units

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PHILLIPS CARBON BLACK LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2458/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

4) power plants whose profits are eligible for deduction u/s 80- IA of the Act. During the relevant year, these power plants had generated and distributed power which was entirely consumed by the manufacturing unit of the assessee. Having regard to the provision of Sec. 801A(8), the electricity transferred from the power plants to the carbon black manufacturing units

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PHILLIPS CARBON BLACK LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2456/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

4) power plants whose profits are eligible for deduction u/s 80- IA of the Act. During the relevant year, these power plants had generated and distributed power which was entirely consumed by the manufacturing unit of the assessee. Having regard to the provision of Sec. 801A(8), the electricity transferred from the power plants to the carbon black manufacturing units

PCBL LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2034/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

4) power plants whose profits are eligible for deduction u/s 80- IA of the Act. During the relevant year, these power plants had generated and distributed power which was entirely consumed by the manufacturing unit of the assessee. Having regard to the provision of Sec. 801A(8), the electricity transferred from the power plants to the carbon black manufacturing units

PRAMOD LAKRA,DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PHILIPS CARBON BLACK LTD , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2459/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(ab)Section 37Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

4) power plants whose profits are eligible for deduction u/s 80- IA of the Act. During the relevant year, these power plants had generated and distributed power which was entirely consumed by the manufacturing unit of the assessee. Having regard to the provision of Sec. 801A(8), the electricity transferred from the power plants to the carbon black manufacturing units

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed and appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 918/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Dhawan Singh & Shri David Z
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 8OSection 92B

4. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in deleting the addition made on account of Arm's Length Price relating to corporate guarantee provided by the assessee for service which is covered u/s.92B of the I.T. Act ? Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has not erred in failing to appreciate the principle that Arm's Length Price is determined from

M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed and appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 2294/KOL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Dhawan Singh & Shri David Z
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 8OSection 92B

4. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in deleting the addition made on account of Arm's Length Price relating to corporate guarantee provided by the assessee for service which is covered u/s.92B of the I.T. Act ? Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has not erred in failing to appreciate the principle that Arm's Length Price is determined from

M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed and appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 2295/KOL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Dhawan Singh & Shri David Z
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 8OSection 92B

4. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in deleting the addition made on account of Arm's Length Price relating to corporate guarantee provided by the assessee for service which is covered u/s.92B of the I.T. Act ? Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has not erred in failing to appreciate the principle that Arm's Length Price is determined from

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed and appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 917/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Dhawan Singh & Shri David Z
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 8OSection 92B

4. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in deleting the addition made on account of Arm's Length Price relating to corporate guarantee provided by the assessee for service which is covered u/s.92B of the I.T. Act ? Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has not erred in failing to appreciate the principle that Arm's Length Price is determined from

I.T.O WD - 8(4),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SPML INFRA LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, to sum up

ITA 2286/KOL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Arup Kr. Sinha, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 80I

sections, designs, working drawings etc. It was to submit the detailed design and the execution drawings such as site plans, general arrangement drawings, L-sections, plans, architectural, structural drawings and all working drawings, for approval. (ii) Materials: All the material required for the work was to be provided by the assessee. (iii) Labour: The assessee was to pay wages

M/S SMPL INFRA LTD ( EASTWHILE M/S SUBHAS PROJECTS & MARKETING LTD),KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CC - XXVIII,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, to sum up

ITA 2035/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Arup Kr. Sinha, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 80I

sections, designs, working drawings etc. It was to submit the detailed design and the execution drawings such as site plans, general arrangement drawings, L-sections, plans, architectural, structural drawings and all working drawings, for approval. (ii) Materials: All the material required for the work was to be provided by the assessee. (iii) Labour: The assessee was to pay wages

EIH LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-8(1)KOL., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 117/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 Eih Ltd V/S. Dcit, Circle-8(1), 4, Mangoe Lane, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Kolkata-700 001 Chowringhee Square, [Pan No.Aaace 6898 B] Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Ravi Sharma, Ar अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri P.K. Srihari, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 27-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 16-05-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Dispute Resolution Panel-2, (Drp For Short) Dated 17.10.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata U/S 144C(13)/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 29.11.2016 For Assessment Year 2012-13 & Grounds Raised By Assessee Read As Under:- “1.0 Determination Of Arm'S Length Price For Corporate Guarantee Fees 1.1 On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Transfer Pricing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld, Tpo") & Accordingly Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld. Ao") Erred In Treating The Corporate Guarantee Extended By The Appellant To Its Associated Enterprise (Ae) As International Transaction & Dispute Resolution Panel (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld, Panel") Erred In Confirming The Same As An International Transaction Without Appreciating The Fact That It Does Not Fall Within The Ambit Of "International Transaction" U/S 92B Of The Act. 1.2 The Ld.Ao/Tpo & The Ld. Panel Failed To Appreciate The Fact That Corporate Guarantee Has Been Advanced By The Appellant As A Matter Of Commercial Prudence To Protect The Business Interest Of The Group By Fulfilling

Section 14Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 92B

price. On the other hand the ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the lower authorities. 10. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. The limited issue arises for our consideration to decide the basis points for determining the cost of interest on the international transaction in respect of interest