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.

48 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 107clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi666Mumbai595Karnataka301Bangalore202Kolkata184Jaipur146Chennai125Ahmedabad120Chandigarh118Hyderabad117Indore103Cochin98Surat57Calcutta51Pune48Raipur27Lucknow26Cuttack19Visakhapatnam13SC13Telangana13Rajkot9Rajasthan8Nagpur6Kerala5Agra4Allahabad3Dehradun2Jodhpur2Orissa2Guwahati1Ranchi1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)43Section 12A42Addition to Income32Section 10(20)24Section 1124Section 92C(3)24Transfer Pricing20Comparables/TP14Section 144C(8)

TETRA PAK INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DY.CIT, CIR.7, PUNE, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 111/PUN/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Aug 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.111/Pun/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Tetra Pak India Private Ltd., Mayfair Towers, Wakdewadi, Shivajinagar, Pune-411005. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaact3467B बनाम / V/S. Dcit, Circle-7, ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak Revenue By : Shri S. B. Prasad सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02.07.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 27.08.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of Assessing Officer/Tpo/Drp For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- “Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Tetra Pak India Private Limited (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Appellant’) Respectfully Craves Leave To Prefer An Appeal Under Section 253(1)(D) Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Act’), Against The Order Dated 25 November 2010 Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax- Circle 7 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Assessing Officer’) Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Act In Pursuance Of The Directions Dated 20 September 2010 Issued By The Honorable Dispute Resolution Panel (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Honorable Drp’), On The Following Grounds: On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Honorable Drp & Consequentially The Learned Ao Have: I Grounds Of Objections In Respect Of Transfer Pricing Adjustment

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad
Section 143(3)

Showing 1–20 of 48 · Page 1 of 3

13
Disallowance13
TDS13
Section 201(1)12
Section 144C(13)
Section 253(1)(d)

transfer pricing adjustment 14. Disallowance of Incremental provision for warranty of Rs.10,198,196/- : Erred in disallowing the incremental provision for warranty of Rs.10,198,196/- by not appreciating the fact that provision for warranty was properly ascertained and was not in the nature of contingent liability and not following the judgment of apex court delivered in the case

MERCEDES BENZ INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. ACIT CIR.9,, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1468/PUN/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1468/Pun/2010 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Mercedes-Benz India Pvt. Ltd., E-3, Midc Chakan, Phase – Iii, Chakan Industrial Area, Kuruli & Nighoje, Tal. Khed, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 410501 …. Pan: Aabcm1789L Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 9, Pune आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.10/Pun/2012 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 Mercedes-Benz India Pvt. Ltd., E-3, Midc Chakan, Phase – Iii, Chakan Industrial Area, Kuruli & Nighoje, Tal. Khed, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 410501 …. Pan: Aabcm1789L Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 9, Pune आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.298/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Mercedes-Benz India Pvt. Ltd., E-3, Midc Chakan, Phase – Iii, Chakan Industrial Area, Kuruli & Nighoje, Tal. Khed, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 410501 …. Pan: Aabcm1789L Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 9, Pune : Shri Pramod Achuthan : Ms. Nandita Kanchan Revenue By घोषणा की तारीख / सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 30.04.2019 Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2019

Section 143(3)Section 92C(2)

107 CBUs. During the year under consideration, total of 1867 vehicles were sold. The Assessing Officer had made reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) under section

MERCEDES-BENZ INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASST. COMM. OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 10/PUN/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1468/Pun/2010 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Mercedes-Benz India Pvt. Ltd., E-3, Midc Chakan, Phase – Iii, Chakan Industrial Area, Kuruli & Nighoje, Tal. Khed, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 410501 …. Pan: Aabcm1789L Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 9, Pune आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.10/Pun/2012 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 Mercedes-Benz India Pvt. Ltd., E-3, Midc Chakan, Phase – Iii, Chakan Industrial Area, Kuruli & Nighoje, Tal. Khed, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 410501 …. Pan: Aabcm1789L Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 9, Pune आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.298/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Mercedes-Benz India Pvt. Ltd., E-3, Midc Chakan, Phase – Iii, Chakan Industrial Area, Kuruli & Nighoje, Tal. Khed, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 410501 …. Pan: Aabcm1789L Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 9, Pune : Shri Pramod Achuthan : Ms. Nandita Kanchan Revenue By घोषणा की तारीख / सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 30.04.2019 Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2019

Section 143(3)Section 92C(2)

107 CBUs. During the year under consideration, total of 1867 vehicles were sold. The Assessing Officer had made reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) under section

MINDA RINDER PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-10, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 2035/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Feb 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviिनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Minda Rinder Private Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle-10, Gat No.148, Mahalunge Ingale, Pune Off. Chakan Talegaon Road, Taluka Khed, Dist. Pune – 410501 Maharashtra Pan : Aaach4211R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Ms. Pallavi Dinodia Revenue By Shri Krishna Kumar Mishra Date Of Hearing 15-02-2021 Date Of Pronouncement 16-02-2021 आदेश / Order

Section 143(3)

107 of the paper book, wherein there is a figure of Rs.15,02,23,827/- under the main column of `Intangible assets’ and sub-column of `Design charges’. The ld. AR contended that the international transaction of Design and Product Development Charges at Rs.10.88 crore is a part of Rs.15.02 crore. This was attempted to be demonstrated with the help

PIAGGIO VEHICLES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -4,, PUNE

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

ITA 3029/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 3029/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Piaggio Vehicles Private Limited „Sky One‟, 9Th Floor, S. No.210, Final Plot No.72, Town Planning Scheme, Yerwada No.1, Kalyani Nagar, Pune-411 006. Pan : Aabcp1225G .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-4, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Bhaskhar Reddy
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

transfer pricing adjustment as done by the income-tax authorities.” The same decision was also followed by the Tribunal for the assessment year 2007-08 in assessee‟s own case again in ITA No.1614/PN/2011 dated 28.06.2013. That the Tribunal in assessee‟s own case for assessment year 2008-09 (supra.) after going through the findings for assessment year

M/S. SAVA HEALTHCARE LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

ITA 1067/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 92C(3)

section 92(A)(1) of the Act, because once the Assessing Officer refers the transactions to TPO, he will be bound to act in conformity with the order of TPO as mandated by section 92CA(4) of the Act. The Ld. AR referred to Instruction No.3/2003, dated 20.05.2013, which is under old scheme, copy of which is placed at pages

M/S. SAVA HEALTHCARE LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

ITA 1065/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 92C(3)

section 92(A)(1) of the Act, because once the Assessing Officer refers the transactions to TPO, he will be bound to act in conformity with the order of TPO as mandated by section 92CA(4) of the Act. The Ld. AR referred to Instruction No.3/2003, dated 20.05.2013, which is under old scheme, copy of which is placed at pages

M/S. SAVA HEALTHCARE LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

ITA 1066/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 92C(3)

section 92(A)(1) of the Act, because once the Assessing Officer refers the transactions to TPO, he will be bound to act in conformity with the order of TPO as mandated by section 92CA(4) of the Act. The Ld. AR referred to Instruction No.3/2003, dated 20.05.2013, which is under old scheme, copy of which is placed at pages

M/S. SAVA HEALTHCARE LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

ITA 1064/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 92C(3)

section 92(A)(1) of the Act, because once the Assessing Officer refers the transactions to TPO, he will be bound to act in conformity with the order of TPO as mandated by section 92CA(4) of the Act. The Ld. AR referred to Instruction No.3/2003, dated 20.05.2013, which is under old scheme, copy of which is placed at pages

M/S. SAVA HEALTHCARE LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

ITA 1062/PUN/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 92C(3)

section 92(A)(1) of the Act, because once the Assessing Officer refers the transactions to TPO, he will be bound to act in conformity with the order of TPO as mandated by section 92CA(4) of the Act. The Ld. AR referred to Instruction No.3/2003, dated 20.05.2013, which is under old scheme, copy of which is placed at pages

M/S. SAVA HEALTHCARE LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

ITA 1063/PUN/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 92C(3)

section 92(A)(1) of the Act, because once the Assessing Officer refers the transactions to TPO, he will be bound to act in conformity with the order of TPO as mandated by section 92CA(4) of the Act. The Ld. AR referred to Instruction No.3/2003, dated 20.05.2013, which is under old scheme, copy of which is placed at pages

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. NIELSOFT LIMITED,, PUNE

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

ITA 556/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2019AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri C. H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Modi

107 TNMM GmbH IT and Factory Software Development and License 5,00,136 TNMM GmbH Fees Neilsoft Inc. Engineering Services (Income) 13,81,01,610 TNMM IT and Factory Engineering Services (Income) 96,70,055 TNMM GmbH Neilsoft Inc. Accounting Services (Income) 21,50,880 TNMM Cadforce Inc. Accounting Services (Income) 22,32,500 TNMM Neilsoft Inc. Advance given

NEILSOFT LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

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

ITA 221/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri C. H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Modi

107 TNMM GmbH IT and Factory Software Development and License 5,00,136 TNMM GmbH Fees Neilsoft Inc. Engineering Services (Income) 13,81,01,610 TNMM IT and Factory Engineering Services (Income) 96,70,055 TNMM GmbH Neilsoft Inc. Accounting Services (Income) 21,50,880 TNMM Cadforce Inc. Accounting Services (Income) 22,32,500 TNMM Neilsoft Inc. Advance given

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 11,, PUNE vs. HSBC SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT (INDIA) PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, CO of assessee is allowed and the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1464/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Respondent: Shri Percy Jal Pardiwalla
Section 10A(7)Section 10BSection 10B(7)Section 143(3)Section 80I

transfer pricing regulation cannot be regarded as the ordinary profits, and it is further contended that the TPO held that the transactions with its AEs are at arm’s length, the profits earned by the assessee company should be accepted as ordinary profits. Rejecting the above submissions, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee company earned more than ordinary profits

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 11,, PUNE vs. HSBC SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,, PUNE

In the result, CO of assessee is allowed and the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2348/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Respondent: Shri Percy Jal Pardiwalla
Section 10A(7)Section 10BSection 10B(7)Section 143(3)Section 80I

transfer pricing regulation cannot be regarded as the ordinary profits, and it is further contended that the TPO held that the transactions with its AEs are at arm’s length, the profits earned by the assessee company should be accepted as ordinary profits. Rejecting the above submissions, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee company earned more than ordinary profits

BILCARE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2720/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2720/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 144C(8)

107 taxmann.com 226 wherein it was held as under : “114……….. But where the TPO has not exercised his jurisdiction, the DRP in exercise of his powers cannot benchmark new transaction though reported by the assessee, in the hands of assessee.” 5 Bilcare Limited 6. It is also brought to our notice that the Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi Tribunal

LIQUIDHUB ANALYTICS PVT. LTD. (NOW MERGED WITH CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LTD),PUNE vs. NFAC, PUNE

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

ITA 1952/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Smt Nilu Jaggi, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)

107 taxmin.com 375/265 Taxman 515/416 ITR 613 (50) The Tribunal has observed that as there was a clear intimation by the assessee vide its letter dared 02 January 2017 informing the Assessing Officer, as also the Transfer Pricing Officer about the amalgamation between SPENI and SPNI under Sections

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. M/S. TETRA PAK INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee for assessment year

ITA 665/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(3)

transfer pricing guidelines passed a detailed order upholding the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and dismissed the grounds raised by Revenue. The Tribunal finally concluded : “21. In view thereof, we uphold the business strategy adopted by the assessee which would follow that sale of machinery, packaging material and straws, etc. were closely interlinked and the same could

TETRA PAK INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee for assessment year

ITA 635/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(3)

transfer pricing guidelines passed a detailed order upholding the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and dismissed the grounds raised by Revenue. The Tribunal finally concluded : “21. In view thereof, we uphold the business strategy adopted by the assessee which would follow that sale of machinery, packaging material and straws, etc. were closely interlinked and the same could

TETRA PAK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee for assessment year

ITA 521/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(3)

transfer pricing guidelines passed a detailed order upholding the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and dismissed the grounds raised by Revenue. The Tribunal finally concluded : “21. In view thereof, we uphold the business strategy adopted by the assessee which would follow that sale of machinery, packaging material and straws, etc. were closely interlinked and the same could