| COURT: | Karnataka High Court |
| CORAM: | Dr. Vineet Kothari J, S. Sujatha J |
| SECTION(S): | 260A, 92C |
| GENRE: | Transfer Pricing |
| CATCH WORDS: | substantial question of law, Transfer Pricing |
| COUNSEL: | K. K. Chaitanya |
| DATE: | June 25, 2018 (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | June 27, 2018 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | 2006-07 |
| FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
| CITATION: | |
| S. 260A: Entire law on when transfer pricing disputes constitute "substantial questions of law" for challenge in the High Court explained. Transfer Pricing Adjustments on the basis of the comparables are a matter of estimate of broad and fair guess-work of the Authorities based on relevant material. The exercise of fact finding or ‘Arm’s Length Price’ determination or ‘Transfer Pricing Adjustments’ should become final with a quietus at the hands of the final fact finding body, i.e. the Tribunal. The ITAT's findings of fact cannot be challenged in the High Court unless it is shown that the findings are ex-facie perverse and unsustainable and exhibit total non-application of mind by the Tribunal to the relevant facts of the case and evidence before it | |
This Court cannot be expected to undertake the exercise of comparison of the comparables itself which is essentially a fact finding exercise. Neither the sufficient Data nor factual informations nor any technical expertise is available with this Court to undertake any such fact finding exercise in the said appeals under Section 260-A of the Act. This Court is only concerned with the question of law and that too a substantial one, which has a well defined connotations as explained above and findings of facts arrived at by the Tribunal in these type of assessments like any other type of assessments in other regular assessment provisions of the Act, viz. Sections 143, 147 etc. are final and are binding on this Court. While dealing with these appeals under Section 260-A of the Act, we cannot disturb those findings of fact under Section 260-A of the Act, unless such findings are ex-facie perverse and unsustainable and exhibit a total nonapplication of mind by the Tribunal to the relevant facts of the case and evidence before the Tribunal.
Recent Comments