Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Knorr Bremse Systems for Commercial Vehicles India (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 198 DTR 196 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-TP adjustments should be restricted to the AE transactions only-Reversal of provision for write back-Matter remanded-VAT refund-Non operating and ice versa-Miscellaneous income-Can not be considered as operating income. [R. 10B]

DCIT. v Kolte Patil Developers Ltd. (2021) 209 TTJ 364 / 198 DTR 1 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Recharacterization of the transaction of debt in to equity is not approved-Bench marking of interest payment to AES at 13. 75 % matter remanded-Additional ground on Education cess was allowed. [S. 94B]

ERM India (P.) Ltd. v. NEAC (2021) 91 ITR 24 (SN) / (2022) 192 ITD 115 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Interest on outstanding receivables-Adjustment is not warranted if pricing/profitability of assessee is more than working capital adjusted margin of comparables companies.

Roxtec India Pvt. Ltd. v ACIT (2021) 210 TTJ 116 / 199 DTR 1 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Assembling of products and sold to customers-TPO was justified in rejecting the RPM and adopting TNMM as the most appropriate method. [R. 10B]

Mtu India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2021) 211 TTJ 978 / 203 DTR 390 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Operating revenue expenses incurred-Order set aside-TP adjustment are only in respect of international transactions and not entry level transactions. [S. 92]

Hyundai Construction India (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 213 TTJ 216 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Customs duty paid-Adjustment is not warranted-Selection of comparable-BEML being a Government company cannot be included in the list of comparables. [R. 10B(1)]

ACIT v. Hyundai Construction India (P) Ltd. (2021) 213 TTJ 203 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Comparable-BEM being a Government company-Not includible in the list of comparables-99.65 per cent of the manufacturing activity of JCB Ltd is functionally similar-Included in the comparables. [R. 10B]

GL&V India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2021) 213 TTJ 117 / (2022) 93 ITR 122 (Pune.)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Working Capital adjustment Advances to suppliers and advances from customers are integral part of working capital adjustment and cannot be excluded in computing working capital adjustment. [R. 10B]

DCIT v. Bhairavanath Sugar Works Ltd. (2021) 62 CCH 0201 / 213 TTJ 703 / 205 DTR 197 (2022)) 96 ITR 420(Pune)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Once it is held that the property is used by the assessee for business purposes and the Revenue fails to bring on record and evidence to the contrary, it is not open to the TPO to apply ‘Other method’ and determining Nil ALP on the premise that no independent party would have paid any rent for not having occupied the premises-Addition of TP adjustment is deleted. [S. 37(1)]

Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. v. DCIT (2021) 62 CCH 0548 / 213 TTJ 377 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-There cannot be a transaction, between independent enterprises, of interest-free debt funding of an overseas SPV by its sponsorer; if such a transaction between independent enterprises is at all hypothetically possible, arm’s length interest on such funding will be ‘nil’-A performance guarantee by SPV, and if such a commitment was reiterated for performance of own obligations, reiteration of this own commitment could not have an arm’s length price. [S. 92A, 92F(ii)]