Section 92C(4) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.165

Section 92C(4) falls under section 92C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 165 (Determination of arm’s length price) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 165 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 92C(4) is CIT v. Nirma Ltd. (397 ITR 49), cited in 82 of the 38 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 92C(4)

CIT v. Nirma Ltd.
397 ITR 49 · 2017 · High Court
82
citing judgments

Interest from debtors and foreign exchange rate difference arising from exports are includible in the eligible profit for computing deductions under section 80HHC.

CIT v. Bhari Information Technology Systems (P.) Ltd.
340 ITR 593 · 2012 · Supreme Court
32
citing judgments

Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is a self-contained code, meaning only adjustments specified within the section are to be considered for book profits. Deductions, such as under Section 80HHC, should be allowed based on book profits, not adjustments under Section 115JB.

CIT v. Impel Forge and Allied
326 ITR 27 · 2010 · High Court
20
citing judgments

An assessee is entitled to claim deductions under Section 80IC (and other similar sections like 80IB) for profits derived from job work charges, as carrying out such work is considered part of the manufacturing process of an industrial undertaking.

24 SC), CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd (
313 ITR 414 · 2009 · Reported
7
citing judgments
Approva Systems (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT, Circle-1, Pune
92 Taxmann.com 82 · 2018 · Reported
7
citing judgments
M/s. Topman Exports v. ITO
125 TTJ 298 · ITAT
6
citing judgments
24/7 Customer (P) Ltd. v. DCIT
153 Taxmann.com 185 · 2023 · Reported
6
citing judgments
CIT v. Light Alloy Product Ltd.
373 ITR 322 · Reported
6
citing judgments
ACIT v. Nagendra Polyplast
69 SOT 718 · ITAT
6
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 92C(4)

Linde Engineering India Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. Pr.CIT- 5, New Delhi

In the result, Assessee‟s appeal stands allowed

ITA 3846/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234BSection 263Section 92C(4)

Ammann India Pvt. Ltd.( Earlier Knows As Ammann Apollo India Pvt. Ltd., Mehsana vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mehsana Circle, Mehsana

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2262/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Adv. with ShriFor Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 92B

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

Maxim India Integrated Circuit Design Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 411/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.411/Bang/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Jha, D.R
Section 10ASection 143(3)

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Eygbs India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2984/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri G Manjunathaassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri Rajan Vora, Sr. Counsel
Section 10ASection 2(24)Section 92Section 92CSection 92C(4)

Shree Sai Smelters (I) Limited, Byrnihat vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Shillong, Shillong

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 228/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati31 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.228/Gau/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) Shree Shai Smelters (I) Ltd. Vs. Acit, Circle-Shillong

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Gupta, FCAFor Respondent: Shri T. Hunar, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40ASection 92B

Shivani Ispat and Rolling Mill (P) Ltd., Byrnihat vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Shillong, Shillong

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 227/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati31 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.227/Gau/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) Shivani Ispatand Rolling Mill Vs. Acit, Circle-Shillong (P) Ltd. 13Th Mile, Tamulkuchi, Byrnihat, G.S. Road, Ri-Bhoi, Meghalaya "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafcs 3465 B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri J.P. Gupta, Fca Respondent By :Shri T. Hunar, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 15/06/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2014-15, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)- Shillong, In Appeal No. Cit(A)/Shg/10083/2018-19 Dated 17.04.2019, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) / 92C(4) / 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The ‘Act’) Dated 30/11/2018. 2.When This Appeal Was Called Out For Hearing, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Invited Our Attention To The Order Dated 10.06.2020, Passed By The Tribunal In The Case Of M/S Raipur Steel Casting India (P) Ltd. & Srinath Ji Furnishing Pvt. Ltd. In I.T.A. No. 895& 1035/Kol/2019, For Assessment Year 2014-15.Wherein Thetribunal Held That Effect Of Omission Of Clause (I) Of Section 92Ba W.E.F 01.04.2017 Had The Effect Of It Being Omitted From Its Inception Hence, Reference

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Gupta, FCAFor Respondent: Shri T. Hunar, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40ASection 92B

Nymphea Developers Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-19(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 7555/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143(2)

Dar A1 Handasah Consultants (Shir & Partners) India Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1 (2), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1414/PUN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi

For Appellant: Shri R.G. Agiwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Deoraj Shegaonkar, DCIT
Section 10ASection 10A(3)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92CSection 92C(4)

DCIT 2 (3), Mumbai vs. Tech Mahindra P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3849/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-05

For Appellant: Mr. J.D. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. A. Mohan, CIT- DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 92CSection 92C(4)

The Addl. CIT, Range-1, Baroda vs. Aerzen Machines (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect

ITA 105/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhit(Tp)A No.105/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Cir.1(1)(1) Aerzen Machnes (India) P.Ltd. Vadodara. Vs. E/115/116, Gidc Mamjusar Savli Vadodara 391 775. (Applicant) (Responent) Revenue By : Sonia Kumar, Sr.Dr : Shri P.B. Parmar, Ar Assessee By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28/08/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/09/2019 आदेश/O R D E R

For Respondent: Sonia Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 268ASection 92C(3)

A.T. Kearney India Pvt. Ltd. (India Branch Office), Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed in

ITA 2623/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2010-11 A.T. Kearney India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, (India Branch Office), Circle 1(1), 6Th Floor, Tower D, New Delhi. Vs Global Business Park, Gurgaon-122002 (Pan: Aadca1436G) Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Ms Vrinda Tulsiyan, Adv. Department By: Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Ms Saweta Nakra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.06.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.06.2019

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

Avery Dennison (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 3(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 5404/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2014-15] Avery Dennison [India] Pvt.Ltd., Vs. The A.C.I.T, P-24, Green Park Extension, Circle - 3(2), New Delhi. New Delhi [Pan: Aaaca 6163 D] [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 22.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2018 Assessee By : Shri Vishal Kalra, Adv Shri S.S. Tomar, Adv

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. G S Engineering & Constructions India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

ITA 3980/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT DR
Section 10A

Sterlite Technologies Ltd, Pune vs. CIT Ltu 1, Mumbai

ITA 4020/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri B.V. Jhaveri-ARFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Swamy (CIT-DR)
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 263Section 43Section 43A

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Timex Watches Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 1652/DEL/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 1652/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Acit, Vs M/S Timex Watches Ltd., Circle-16(1), 117, Ground Floor, World Trade New Delhi Centre, Babar Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact0773C Assessee By : Sh. K. M. Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Gautam Jain, Ca Revenue By : Sh. B. Ramanjaneyulu, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.05.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.05.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 31.01.2012 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xx, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. K. M. Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. B. Ramanjaneyulu, Sr. DR
Section 37(1)Section 92C

Techsource Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO RG 9(3)(3), Mumbai

ITA 6966/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jan 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Shiddaramappa Kappattanavar-DR
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 92Section 92C

M/S Austin Medical Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2008-09 is allowed

ITA 542/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jul 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P. Boazi.T. (T.P) A. No.542/Bang/2012 (Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S. Austin Medical Solutions Pvt. Ltd., No.23, Sydney Park, 2Nd Floor, Prestige Takt Kasturba Road Cross, Bangalore-560 001 …. Appellant. Pan Aaeca 5725B Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 11(1), Bangalore. ….. Respondent. Appellant By : Shri H.N. Khincha, C.A. Respondent By : Shri P. Dhivahar, Jcit (D.R) Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2015. Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2015. O R D E R Per Shri Jason P. Boaz, A.M. : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Iv, Bangalore Dt.24.2.2012 For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Facts Of The Case, Briefly, Are As Under :- 2.1 The Assessee, An Indian Company Engaged In The Business Of Export Of Software & Ites, Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2008-09 On 18.12.2008 Declaring Nil Income. In The Return Of Income, The Income From Business Was Computed At Rs.63,02,287; Which Included An Amount Of Rs.28,61,352 By Way Of A Suo Moto Transfer Pricing Adjustment To The Arm’S Length

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Khincha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, JCIT (D.R)
Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 92Section 92CSection 92C(4)