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 191clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi350Mumbai282Karnataka254Bangalore111Chennai88Hyderabad73Indore61Kolkata56Pune44Ahmedabad44Jaipur38Rajkot25Raipur20Cochin17Calcutta16Surat14Chandigarh12Lucknow12Telangana9Cuttack8Varanasi5SC5Rajasthan3Allahabad3Visakhapatnam2Amritsar2Guwahati2Jodhpur2Agra2Orissa1Nagpur1Andhra Pradesh1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)52Section 12A42Section 10(20)24Section 1124Section 3521Section 10A18Transfer Pricing18Addition to Income17Comparables/TP17

M/S. HONEYWELL AUTOMATION INDIA LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 446/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Kamal ShaneyFor Respondent: Smt. Nandita Kanchan
Section 10ASection 10A(7)

Transfer Pricing assessment can at best be taken as an indicator for the Assessing Officer to investigate as to whether or not there exists any arrangement which has resulted in more than ordinary profits qua the requirements of section 10A(7) r.w.s. 80-IA(10) of the Act. Even if it is accepted that the difference between the operating margins

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. HONEYWELL AUTOMATION INDIA LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Showing 1–20 of 44 · Page 1 of 3

Deduction14
Section 92C12
Section 115J9
ITA 473/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Kamal ShaneyFor Respondent: Smt. Nandita Kanchan
Section 10ASection 10A(7)

Transfer Pricing assessment can at best be taken as an indicator for the Assessing Officer to investigate as to whether or not there exists any arrangement which has resulted in more than ordinary profits qua the requirements of section 10A(7) r.w.s. 80-IA(10) of the Act. Even if it is accepted that the difference between the operating margins

NIHILENT TECHNOLOGIES P.LTD.,PUNE vs. ITO, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 2428/PUN/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2018AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 92C

transfer pricing issues. 3. First we will take up the Non-TP issues i.e. the ground No. 1 relating to computation of book profits under MAT provisions. The assessee has filed abridged grounds of appeal. The ground No. 1 raised in the appeal is as under : ―On facts and in law, 1] The learned DRP 1 A.O. erred in computing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 5,, PUNE vs. RENISHAW METROLOGY SYSTEMS LTD,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2975/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.376/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Renishaw Metrology Systems Ltd., S.No.283, Hissa No.2, S.No.284, Hissa No.2 & 3A, Raisoni Estate, Village Mann, Taluka Mulshi, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411057 …. Pan: Aabcr6361F Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1(2), Pune

For Appellant: S/Shri Arijit Chakravarty and Abhishek TilakFor Respondent: Mrs. Nandita Kanchan
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 92C(2)Section 92C(3)Section 92D

transfer pricing adjustment in the segment of provision of software development services by the assessee to its associated enterprises. The assessee had applied TNMM method and had taken net profit / total cost as its PLI and had selected certain concerns as comparables, which were objected to by the Assessing Officer. The TPO finally selected 9 concerns as comparables as accepted

M/S. RENISHAW METROLOGY SYSTEMS LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 376/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.376/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Renishaw Metrology Systems Ltd., S.No.283, Hissa No.2, S.No.284, Hissa No.2 & 3A, Raisoni Estate, Village Mann, Taluka Mulshi, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411057 …. Pan: Aabcr6361F Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1(2), Pune

For Appellant: S/Shri Arijit Chakravarty and Abhishek TilakFor Respondent: Mrs. Nandita Kanchan
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 92C(2)Section 92C(3)Section 92D

transfer pricing adjustment in the segment of provision of software development services by the assessee to its associated enterprises. The assessee had applied TNMM method and had taken net profit / total cost as its PLI and had selected certain concerns as comparables, which were objected to by the Assessing Officer. The TPO finally selected 9 concerns as comparables as accepted

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. HONEYWELL AUTOMATION INDIA LIMITED,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 845/PUN/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jun 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryिनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 3(22)Section 92BSection 92C

191/-. On the basis of the sustained amount of transfer pricing addition, the AO imposed penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act amounting to Rs.1,48,40,838/-. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the same. The Revenue has come up in appeal against such deletion. 3. We have heard both the sides through Virtual Court and gone through the relevant

M/S. TRIPLE POOINT TECHNOLOGY (INDIA) P.LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee in assessment year 2011-12 is allowed, appeal of Revenue in assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed and the appeal of assessee in assessment year 2012-13 is partly al...

ITA 581/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.581/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Triple Point Technology (India) Pvt. Ltd., Building No.3, Commerzone, Survey No.144/145, Samrat Ashok Path, Airport Road, Yerwada, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411006 …. Pan:Aabct8184A Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 7, Pune

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Sawlney & Ms. Ria Amar
Section 143(3)

section 92CA(1) of the Act to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to compute the arm's length price of international transactions entered into by the assessee with its associated enterprises. The TPO noted that the assessee was a subsidiary of Triple Point US and was engaged in providing software development services to its associated enterprises. The assessee was also

M/S. TRIPLE POINT TECHNOLOGY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of assessee in assessment year 2011-12 is allowed, appeal of Revenue in assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed and the appeal of assessee in assessment year 2012-13 is partly al...

ITA 786/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.581/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Triple Point Technology (India) Pvt. Ltd., Building No.3, Commerzone, Survey No.144/145, Samrat Ashok Path, Airport Road, Yerwada, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411006 …. Pan:Aabct8184A Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 7, Pune

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Sawlney & Ms. Ria Amar
Section 143(3)

section 92CA(1) of the Act to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to compute the arm's length price of international transactions entered into by the assessee with its associated enterprises. The TPO noted that the assessee was a subsidiary of Triple Point US and was engaged in providing software development services to its associated enterprises. The assessee was also

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. TRIPLE POINT TECHNLOGY INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of assessee in assessment year 2011-12 is allowed, appeal of Revenue in assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed and the appeal of assessee in assessment year 2012-13 is partly al...

ITA 628/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.581/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Triple Point Technology (India) Pvt. Ltd., Building No.3, Commerzone, Survey No.144/145, Samrat Ashok Path, Airport Road, Yerwada, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411006 …. Pan:Aabct8184A Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 7, Pune

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Sawlney & Ms. Ria Amar
Section 143(3)

section 92CA(1) of the Act to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to compute the arm's length price of international transactions entered into by the assessee with its associated enterprises. The TPO noted that the assessee was a subsidiary of Triple Point US and was engaged in providing software development services to its associated enterprises. The assessee was also

VISTEON ENGINEERING CENTER (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Accordingly, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 316/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved & Ms. Nupoor ShahFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 143(3)

191 (Part) and 192 (Part), Sub Plot No. B, Mumbai-Pune Road, Pimpri Waghere, Pune-411018 PAN : AACCT2585N .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 13, Pune ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / ITA No.540/PUN/2015 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 13, Pune .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Visteon Engineering Center

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. VISTEON ENGG. CENTER (I) PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

Accordingly, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 540/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved & Ms. Nupoor ShahFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 143(3)

191 (Part) and 192 (Part), Sub Plot No. B, Mumbai-Pune Road, Pimpri Waghere, Pune-411018 PAN : AACCT2585N .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 13, Pune ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / ITA No.540/PUN/2015 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 13, Pune .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Visteon Engineering Center

SEMPERTRANS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,ROHA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, PANVEL

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly\nallowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1778/PUN/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Nov 2025
Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 153Section 92CSection 92D

Transfer\nPricing Officer (TPO) u/s.92CA(1) of the Act for determination\nof Arm's Length Price (ALP) with the reference to the\ninternational transactions reported in Form No.3CEB filed by\nthe assessee. Ld. TPO after considering the submission of\nthe assessee firstly observed that the ALP of the payment of\nRoyalty for Trademark fees is Nil as the assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), PUNE vs. M/S. BILCARE LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 273/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta
Section 92C

transfer pricing adjustment on corporate guarantee fee came up for consideration before the Tribunal in the assessee‘s own case for the A.Yrs. 2013-14 and 2014-15. The lead order was passed for the A.Y. 2014-15 in ITA No.1693/PUN/2018 holding that guarantee fee should be charged at 0.5%, which should be further increased by any expenditure actually incurred

M/S. BILCARE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 334/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta
Section 92C

transfer pricing adjustment on corporate guarantee fee came up for consideration before the Tribunal in the assessee‘s own case for the A.Yrs. 2013-14 and 2014-15. The lead order was passed for the A.Y. 2014-15 in ITA No.1693/PUN/2018 holding that guarantee fee should be charged at 0.5%, which should be further increased by any expenditure actually incurred

CREDENCE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PVT LTD.,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)., , PUNE

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 133/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jun 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 133/Pun/2021 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain &For Respondent: Shri Mahadevan A M Krishnan
Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 144C(8)Section 92CSection 92D

Section 144C(8) of the Act, would not render the other findings as invalid or contrary to law and therefore, we observe that in this background, the prayer of the assessee on this legal grounds cannot be accepted and hence, dismissed. Thereafter, the assessee on merits submitted that he prayed for exclusion of four comparable companies viz. A. Manipal Digital

M/S. T - 3 ENERGY SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 826/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.826/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. T-3 Energy Services India Pvt. Ltd., D-Ii/65-1, Midc, Telco Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Chinchwad, Pune – 411019 …. Pan: Aacct9805F Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Range – 10, Pune

For Appellant: S/Shri Arijit Chakravarty and Shraddha SwarupFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Aggarwal
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)Section 92C

191/-. The Assessing Officer referred the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for computing arm's length price in respect of international transactions entered into by the assessee with its associated enterprises. The TPO vide order dated 10.10.2013 under section

WOCKHARDT LIMITED,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTAMT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -3,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is partly allowed, the appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed and the CO filed by assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 758/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.775/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Acit, Circle-3, Aurangabad .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Wockhardt Ltd., R&D Centre, D-4, Midc, Chikalthana, Aurangabad. Pan: Aaacw2472M ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.758/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Wockhardt Ltd., R&D Centre, D-4, Midc, Chikalthana, Aurangabad. Pan: Aaacw2472M .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Acit, Circle-3, Aurangabad ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Co No.43/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Wockhardt Ltd., R&D Centre, D-4, Midc, Chikalthana, Aurangabad. Pan: Aaacw2472M .......Cross Objector बिधम / V/S. Acit, Circle-3, Aurangabad ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Co No.43/Pun/2019

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Shri Anurag Shivastava
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35Section 80ISection 92B

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) of Rs.109,81,22,628/-, disallowance of excess claim of deduction u/s 80IC of Rs.9,61,86,526/-, disallowance under provisions of section 35(2AB) of Rs.65,55,77,068/-, disallowance of Freebies to Doctors of Rs.1,19,82,100/-, disallowance u/s CO No.43/PUN/2019 14A of Rs.78,87,413/- and disallowance of Provision for BDDR

M/S. OCWEN FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 11,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2520/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 2520/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Ocwen Financial Solutions Private Limited. Pritech Park, Block-12, Unit-2, 5B & 6A Floors, Bellandur Village, Sarjapur, Marathahalli Ring Road, Bangalore-560 103. Pan : Aaaco3764E .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil MuthaFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena
Section 144C(5)Section 92C

transfer pricing study is the data relating to the financial year in which the international transaction has been entered. The word "contemporaneously" is used in Rule 100 so as to mean that such documents mentioned therein have to be maintained as and when the business of the tax payer is carried on during the course of financial year. This word

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)

191,654,869 8 Cost Allocation Received 15,126,588 9 Reimbursement received from Associates 38,032,427 10 Reimbursement paid to Associates 57,686,719 2.1 To benchmark international transactions the assessee applied Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) as the most appropriate method. The Profit Level Indicator (Operating Profit/Sales) of the assessee and comparables for Packaging solutions segment

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)

191,654,869 8 Cost Allocation Received 15,126,588 9 Reimbursement received from Associates 38,032,427 10 Reimbursement paid to Associates 57,686,719 2.1 To benchmark international transactions the assessee applied Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) as the most appropriate method. The Profit Level Indicator (Operating Profit/Sales) of the assessee and comparables for Packaging solutions segment