This Digest of case laws is prepared by KSA Legal and AIFTP from judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals
Click here to download the pdf versions of the Digest of case laws

S. 92C : Transfer Pricing—Arm’s length price—Purchases of cars by assessee from RNAIPL would not come within meaning of international transaction-Marketing expenses-No addition can be made. [S. 92B]

Renault India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 193 TTJ 542 (Chennai)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing—adjustment—financial advisory solutions in the field of investment banking division–TNMM method entry level- Effective representation was not made before TPO or CIT(A) –Matter remanded to the AO / TPO.

Lehman Brothers Securities (P) Ltd v. DCIT (2018) 192 TTJ 58 (UO) (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer Pricing—Transport Segment-Import of raw materials and components-Import of finished goods-and Export of finished goods—Additional evidence was filed-Matter remanded.

Carrier Air-Conditioning & Refrigeration Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 172 DTR 49 / 195 TTJ 777 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing—Comparables—Functionally indifferent companies cannot be selected as good comparable-Asset management company cannot be compared with market support services.

Philip Morris Services India S.A. v. ACIT (2018) 172 DTR 192 / 66 ITR 97 / (2019) 197 TTJ 128 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing–Arm’s length price–Notional interest– Loan to AE–Estimate of interest at 11% was held to be not valid when the assessee had charged the interest at 8%-Rule of consistency is followed–Bench mark transaction-Cup method–Adjustment made was deleted–Ad hoc method cannot be applied. [S. 92CA] .

DCIT v. Emami Limited. (2018) 171 DTR 361 / 196 TTJ 570 (Kol.)(Trib.)

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Bogus Purchases-Raw material-Survey-Letters were issued to the purchasers after five years of end of assessment year-purchasers are witness of department and did not turn of for cross examination- Inspectors report was not confronted to the assessee- Deletion of addition was held to be justified. [S. 133A, 143(3), 145]

Dy.CIT v. Padmini Vna Mechatronics Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 171 DTR 83 / 195 TTJ 649 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 69 : Unexplained investment –Undisclosed income-Merely on the basis of AIR information and ITS data addition cannot be made. [S.131, 133(6), 143(3)]

Dy.CIT v. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India (P) Ltd. (2018) 193 TTJ 65 (UO) (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 44BBB : Foreign companies-Civil construction-Turnkey power projects -Books of account maintained–Applicability of presumptive taxation cannot be thrust upon the assessee.[ S.44AA, 44AB, 44BBB,145 (3)]

ADIT(IT) v. Shandong Tiejun Electric Power Engineering Co. Ltd. (2018) 193 TTJ 483 (Ahd.)(Trib.)

S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source– Interest–Commission–Brokerage-Insurance commission–Reinsurance premium from various insurance companies–Not liable to deduct tax at source.[S. 194D]

ACIT v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. (2018) 67 ITR 191 /195 TTJ 65 (UO) (Chennai)(Trib.)

S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident–Reimbursement of expenses–Not liable to deduct tax at sources.

ACIT v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. (2018) 67 ITR 191 /195 TTJ 65 (UO) (Chennai)(Trib.)