Section 92(1) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.161

Section 92(1) falls under section 92 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 161 (Computation of income from international transaction and Specified domestic Transaction having regard to arm’s length price) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 161 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 92(1) is Dabur India Ltd. v. Pr. CIT (89 Taxmann.com 78), cited in 19 of the 90 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 92(1)

Dabur India Ltd. v. Pr. CIT
89 Taxmann.com 78 · 2018 · High Court
19
citing judgments

The Delhi High Court upheld an adjustment to the Arm's Length Price (ALP) for royalty payable by a foreign associated enterprise for using a brand name, even in the absence of a formal royalty agreement.

Tops Group Electronic Systems Ltd. v. ITO
67 Taxmann.com 310 · 2016 · ITAT
12
citing judgments

A transfer pricing adjustment re-characterizing equity investment as a loan is not permissible if it questions the commercial expediency of the assessee's transaction. Such adjustments are also not applicable for assessment years commencing on or before April 1, 2016, as per Section 92CE(1) proviso (ii).

Reitzel India Private Limited v. DCIT (
119 Taxmann.com 401 · 2020 · Reported
4
citing judgments
Continental Automotive Components (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (
139 Taxmann.com 187 · 2022 · Reported
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 92(1)

O/O DCIT 3(3) (1), Room No. 668, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Churchgate, Mumbai vs. M/S. Sikka Ports & Terminals Ports Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 2139/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

Sikka Ports & Terminals Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(3) (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 2022/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

M/S. Faurecia Automotive Seating India Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 9, Pune

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1592/PUN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1592/Pun/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12

Section 143(3)

M/S. Steer Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-6(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2071/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathyassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Steer Engineering Private Limited, Vs. Dcit, No.290, 4Th Main, 4Th Phase, Circle – 6(1)(2), Peenya Industrial Area, Nagawara, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 058. Pan : Aabcs 8840 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Narendra Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Mrs. Susan D. George, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 18.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.04.2022

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 144CSection 92(1)Section 92ASection 92A(1)Section 92CSection 92C(2)Section 92F

Epson India Private Limited, Ulsoor vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 205/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri. Padam Chand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT DR
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)

Anz Support Services India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 185/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri. Chavali Narayanan, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92BSection 92B(1)Section 92C

Oriental Aromatics Ltd, Mumbi, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 1(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6331/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 4Section 92(1)

Xavient Information Systems (I) Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 472/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: FixedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2022AY 2010-11
Section 120Section 127Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 92A(2)(b)

M/S Arctern Consulting Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1)(2), Bangalore

ITA 352/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore11 Jan 2022AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92(1)

M/S Infor (Bangalore) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3188/BANG/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Jan 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2005-06 M/S. Infor (Bangalore) Private Limited, Vs. Dcit, (Previously Softbrands India Private Ltd. & Circle – 3(1)(1), Now Merged With Infor India Private Ltd.,), Bengaluru. 302, 3Rd Floor, Prestige Sigma, #3, Vittal Mallya Road, Bengaluru – 560 001. Pan : Aafcs 9041 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Srinivas K P, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 11.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.01.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Srinivas K P, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 92(1)Section 92C

M/S. Atmecs Technologies Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 187/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Dec 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.187/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Atmecs Technologies Private Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Flat No.301, M J Towers, H-No.8-2-698, Ward -1(1)(1), Road No.12, Bengaluru. Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, Telangana – 500 034. Pan : Aamca 0792 J Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. P.V.S.S.Prasad, Ca Respondent By : Shri. Arunkumar, Cit(Tp-2)(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 14.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.12.2021 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Final Order Of Assessment Dated 30.3.2021 By The National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter Referred To As The Assessing Officer, “Ao” In Short) Passed U/S.143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) In Relation To Ay 2016-2017. 2. The Assessee In Engaged In The Business Of Provision Of Software Development Services (Swd Services), To It’S Associated Enterprises

For Appellant: Shri. P.V.S.S.Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Arunkumar, CIT(TP-2)(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)Section 92C

Capco Technologies Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 204/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Nov 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.204/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Capco Technologies Private Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Sjr I-Park, Ground Floor, Tower 2, Block Circle -2(1)(1), Phi, Ramagondanahalli, Whitefield S.O, Bengaluru. Bengaluru. Pan : Aadcc 4204 G Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Sandeep Huilgol, Advocate Respondent By : Shri. Srinivas T Bidari, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 16.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2021 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Final Order Of Assessment Dated 26.04.2021 By The National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter Referred To As The Assessing Officer, “Ao” In Short) Passed U/S.143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) In Relation To Ay 2016-2017. 2. The Assessee In Engaged In The Business Of Provision Of Software Development Services (Swd Services), To Capco Group. The Assessee Is A Wholly Owned Subsidiary Of Capco Belgium Bvba, Belgium. In Terms Of The Provisions Of Sec.92-A Of The Act, The Assessee & Its It(Tp)A No.204/Bang/2021 Page 2 Of 27

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Huilgol, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Srinivas T Bidari, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)

M/S. Borqs Software Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 310/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri. Tata Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad vs. Nava Bharat Ventures Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the questions referred to us are answered accordingly”

ITA 11/HYD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P.V.S.S.Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Smt.S.Praveena, DR
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 92(1)Section 92CSection 92C(4)Section 92F

M/S Closure Systems International India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 680/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.680/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Pact Closure Systems (India) Private Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, (Formerly Known As Closure Systems International Ward – 2(1)(1), India Private Limited) Bengaluru. Survey No.35 & 36, Soukhya Road, Kacherkanahalli, Hoskote Taluk, Bengaluru – 560 067. Pan : Aadcc 7884 N Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, Advocate Respondent By : Shri. Muzaffar Hussain, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 09.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.09.2021 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Final Order Of Assessment Dated 18.01.2017 Passed By The Ito, Ward – 2(1)(1), Bengaluru, Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’), In Relation To Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Grounds 1 To 6 Raised By The Assessee Are General In Nature & Does Not Call For Any Specific Adjudication. Grounds 7 To 20 Raised By The Assessee Is In Relation To Determination Of Arm’S Length Price (Alp) In Respect Of International Transaction Entered Into By The Assessee With Its Associated Enterprise (Ae). The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of It(Tp)A No.209/Bang/2015 Page 2 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 92C

Microchip Technology (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1498/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranit(Tp)A No.1498/Bang/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Microchip Technology (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.149-B, Epip 1St Phase, Income Tax, Industrial Area, Whitefield, Circle – 4(1)(2), Bangalore – 560 066. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcm 9868 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Darpan Kirpalani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Pradeep Kumar, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 08.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.03.2021

For Appellant: Shri. Darpan Kirpalani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)

M/S Fidelity Business Services India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 308/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.308/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Fidelity Business Services India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pinehurst, Embassy Golf Links Business Park, Circle – 3(1)(1), Off Intermediate Ring Road, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 071. Pan : Aaacf 6175 E Assessee By : Shri. G. C. Srivastava, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. B. K. Panda, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore Date Of Hearing : 15.12.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.12.2020 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. G. C. Srivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. B. K. Panda, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Alcon Laboratories (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, both the appeal by the revenue and cross objection by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 221/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Nov 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR-I), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 92(1)Section 92ASection 92B(1)Section 92C

Broadcom Communication Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 704/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A K Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Bijay Kumar Panda, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 92(1)Section 92ASection 92B(1)

Kellogg India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 15(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 137/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode)

For Appellant: Shri Akhtar H. Ansari-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92(1)Section 926