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)

M/S Success Factors Business Solutions India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 674/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Aliasgar Rampurwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)Section 92C

Imsofer Manufacturing India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purpose

ITA 1049/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing) & [A.Y 2009-10 & 2010-11]

For Appellant: Sh.Ajit Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M. Bavanwal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 253Section 92C(2)Section 92D

Imsofer Manufacturing India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purpose

ITA 5158/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing) & [A.Y 2009-10 & 2010-11]

For Appellant: Sh.Ajit Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M. Bavanwal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 253Section 92C(2)Section 92D

Essar Shipping Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-5(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground No.10 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7371/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm Essar Shipping Ltd., Vs. A.C.I.T.-5(1)(2), 11, K.K. Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai. Mumbai-400034. Pan/Gir No.Aacce 3707 D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 115VSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

Panasonic Energy India Co.Ltd, Baroda vs. The Addl.CIT, Range-4, Baroda

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1892/AHD/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jan 2020AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Marfatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234BSection 234DSection 271Section 92C

Tecnimont Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Range 13(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed in

ITA 5427/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

Section 143(3)Section 92B(2)

Technimont P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 13(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed in

ITA 1238/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

Section 143(3)Section 92B(2)

Van Oord India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 5(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 720/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: S/Shri Nishant Thakkar, RishiFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harit, D.R
Section 115VSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 28Section 43CSection 92Section 92(1)Section 92CSection 92C(4)Section 92E

DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi vs. M/S Tmw Aspf I Cyprus Holding Company Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and CO IS allowed

ITA 879/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kantasstt. Year: 2011-12 Dcit (International M/S. Tmw Aspf I Cyprus Holding Taxation) Company Ltd., C/O Deloitee Circle 3 (1)(1), Hasking & Sells Llp, New Delhi. 7Th Floor, Bldg. 10, Tower-B, Dlf Vs. Cyber City Complex, Dlf City Phase – Ii, Gurgaon 122 002 Haryana Pan Aacct6680J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Koushal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT ( DR )
Section 92(1)

Fujitsu Consulting India P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-9(2), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 140/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2014-15 Fujitsu Consulting India P. Ltd., Acit, N-63, Lajpat Nagar-Iv, Circle-9(2), Vs New Delhi- 110024 New Delhi. (Pan: Aaach8894G) Appellant Respondent Assessee By: S/Shri Nageswar Rao, Purushottam Anand, Advocates Department By: Shri Sanjay I. Bara, C.I.T. Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.05.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.08.2019 O R D E R

For Appellant: S/Shri Nageswar Rao, Purushottam Anand, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I. Bara, C.I.T. DR
Section 92

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -11, Pune vs. Ina Bearings India Private Limited, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1940/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1911/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ina Bearings India Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.A3, Talegaon Industrial Area, Navalkh Umbre, Tal. Maval Talegaon, Pune-410 507. Pan : Aaaci7163H .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1940/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11, Pune. .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. Ina Bearings India Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.A3, Talegaon Industrial Area & Floriculture Area, Village- Ambi, Navlakha Umbre, Tal. Maval Talegaon, Pune-410 507. Pan : Aaaci7163H ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Amrin Pathan & Shri Sandeep Shah Revenue By : Shri Sandip Garg, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 30.07.2019 A.Y.2012-13

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan &For Respondent: Shri Sandip Garg, CIT
Section 92(1)Section 92BSection 92CSection 92C(1)Section 92F

Ina Bearings India Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 11, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1911/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1911/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ina Bearings India Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.A3, Talegaon Industrial Area, Navalkh Umbre, Tal. Maval Talegaon, Pune-410 507. Pan : Aaaci7163H .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1940/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11, Pune. .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. Ina Bearings India Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.A3, Talegaon Industrial Area & Floriculture Area, Village- Ambi, Navlakha Umbre, Tal. Maval Talegaon, Pune-410 507. Pan : Aaaci7163H ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Amrin Pathan & Shri Sandeep Shah Revenue By : Shri Sandip Garg, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 30.07.2019 A.Y.2012-13

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan &For Respondent: Shri Sandip Garg, CIT
Section 92(1)Section 92BSection 92CSection 92C(1)Section 92F

Fnf Business Process Outsourcing Services India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals by the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 459/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, CIT(DR-I)ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92(1)Section 92ASection 92B(1)Section 92C

Fnf Business Process Outsourcing Services India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals by the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 195/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, CIT(DR-I)ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92(1)Section 92ASection 92B(1)Section 92C

Heidelberg Cement India Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/125/2018HC Punjab & Haryana19 Mar 2019
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 260ASection 92C

M/S. Chemetall Rai India Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1720/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chadhury

DCIT, Cir-11, Kolkata vs. M/S Sika India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part and in appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 402/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

Sika India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-11, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part and in appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 393/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

M/S.Filtrex Technologies Private Ltd., Bangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 469/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazit(Tp)A Nos.469/Bang/2017 (Asst. Year – 2012-13) M/S Filtrex Technologies Pvt. Ltd., #36/4, Raghavendra Nagar, Near Ring Road, 4Th Cross, Hrbr Layout, Bangalore. Pan – Aaacf4091P. …..Appellant Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-(3)(1), Bengaluru. …. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Padmchand Khincha, C.A Respondent By : Shri C.H Sundar Rao, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 08-03-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 11-04-2018 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Padmchand Khincha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri C.H Sundar Rao, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 92

Owens-Corning (India) Private Limited (Formerly Known As Owens-Corning (India) Limited), Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Range 7(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, as above

ITA 5959/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Mar 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singh: (A.Y : 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir D. MistryFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar &
Section 143(3)