Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Bostik India P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022)96 ITR 25 (SN) (Bang) (Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer Pricing-Arm’s Length Price-Manufacturing and marketing-Transactional Net Margin Method most appropriate-Transfer Pricing Officer’s Reasoning of constructing a hypothetical comparable uncontrolled price based on study of third party scenario is not envisaged [S.92CA]

Dy. CIT v. Bmc Software (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2022)96 ITR 18 (SN) (Pune) (Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer Pricing-Arm’s Length Price-Comparables-Government of India Company not Comparable with Assessee-Excluded from List of Comparables. [S.92CA]

Xchanging Solutions Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022)96 ITR 544 (Bang) (Trib)

S. 92C: Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Software development services-Working capital adjustment on account of outstanding receivables-Matter remanded. [S.92CA]

Xchanging Solutions Ltd. v.Dy. CIT (2022)96 ITR 544 (Bang) (Trib)

S. 92C: Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Comparables-Companies with turnover in excess of Rs. 200 Crores-Not comparable.

Sabic India Pvt. Ltd. v Dy. CIT (2022)96 ITR 368 (Trib)(Delhi) (Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Net margin method-Support services to its associated enterprises-Transfer Pricing Officer discarding transactional net margin method adopted by assessee and accepted by Department for several years without assigning any specific reason-Held to be not proper. [S.92CA]

Lite-On Mobile India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 96 ITR 352 (Chennai) (Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Fees for managerial services-No evidence of nature of services rendered-Transfer Pricing adjustment required for consideration paid for services. [S. 92CA]

U.L. India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022)96 ITR 191 (Bang)(Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Change in method of revenue recognition deferring recognition of revenue-Assessing Officer to give consequential relief in year in which revenue deferred was offered to tax. [S. 145]

U.L. India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 96 ITR 191 (Bang.) (Trib.)

S. 92C: Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Related party transactions-Threshold limit for applying related party transaction filter should Be 15 Per Cent. or 25 Per Cent. depending upon the availability of comparable companies.

U.L. India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022)96 ITR 191 (Trib)(Bang) (Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Having high turnover-Turnover is a relevant criterion for choosing comparable [R. 10B]

U.L. India Pvt. Ltd. v Dy. CIT (2022)96 ITR 191 (Bang)(Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Comparables-Assessee Engaged In Offshore Information Technology Enabled Services-Not to be included in list of comparables-Company having different financial year-Results of company for relevant financial year could be carved out-To be included in list of comparables-Working Capital Adjustment-Allowable on actual basis without any restriction.