Home › Tax Laws › Kellogg India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2019) 182 DTR 280 / 201 TTJ 393 (Mum.)(Trib.)

Kellogg India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2019) 182 DTR 280 / 201 TTJ 393 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price–No express agreement shown to exist between assessee and AE for incurring ALP expenses for promotion of brand of AE–hence, AMP expenses cannot come within the purview of the international transaction-Determination of ALP of royalty at Nil is not sustainable-Applying rule of consistency-payment of royalty paid in earlier and subsequent years-has to be accepted.

Held that; 

  • In the absence of an express arrangement / agreement between the assessee and the AE, expenditure incurred by making payment to third parties for advertisement, marketing and promotion (AMP) expenses, does not come within the purview of international transaction and determination of ALP of such expenditure by applying BLT method is not valid.
  • When the payment of royalty in the past assessment years was undisputed, inference in the current assessment year by making general observations is unsustainable. (AY. 2009-10)