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-Comparable-Negative margin-Comaprable-Segmental details relating to various segments were not available–Sale of software license-Segmental details relating to revenue earned were not discernible-Could not be selected as comparable. [S. 92CA]

Norton Lifelock Software Solution (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 215 DTR 279 / 220 TTJ 527 / 135 taxmann.com 247 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Failure to place verifiable information-Justified in rejecting as tested party-Turnover filter-Difference in turnover is not substantial-Cannot be excluded-Adjustment should be restricted only to international transactions and not entity level transactions. [S. 92CA]

A Raymood Fasteners India (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 215 TTJ 228 / [2022] 134 taxmann.com 145 (Pune) (Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Guarantee commission fee of 1 percent-Held to be reasonable-Followed order of earlier year-Share capital-Adjustment of interest to be made with other loans giving similar privilege-Business expenditure-TPO only has to ascertain arm’s length price of a transaction and it is not TPO’s job to decide whether a business enterprise should have incurred a particular expense or not. [S. 37(1), 92CA]

Cadila Healthcare Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 133 taxmann.com 500 / (2022) 216 TTJ 656 (Ahd)(Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Captive power plants-Eligible business-(State Electricity Board (SEB)-Transaction of transfer of power in Rajasthan from eligible unit to non-eligible unit should be benchmarked at purchase price of power from SEB-Steam cannot be determined at nil. [S. 80IA 92BA]

DCM Shriram Ltd. v. Addl CIT (2022) 215 TTJ 299 / 212 DTR 201 / 140 taxmann.com 217 (Delhi)(Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Manufacturing of compressors and mining & production tools-Four types of cost-TPO was not justified in considering only two expenses, namely, manufacturing and marketing as contributing to earning of profits. [S. 92CA]

Dy. CIT v. Atlas Copco (India) Ltd (2022) 213 DTR 1/ 217 TTJ 231/ 141 taxmann.com 192 (Pune)(Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Engineering design services-Separate segmental accounts-Adjustment made by TPO was deleted. [S. 92CA]

Neilsoft (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 209 DTR 225/ 215 TTJ 545 / 136 taxmann.com 66 (Pune) (Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Technical service fee-Relief granted for AY. 2004-05 was not challenged-Addition was deleted. [S. 92CA]

SS Oral Hygine Products (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 220 TTJ 939 / 145 taxmann.com 285 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Aggregation of transaction-justified in segregating international transaction of professional charges to be processed independent of other international transactions-Allowability of expenditure-Matter remanded. [S. 92CA]

Faurecia Automotive Seating India (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 220 TTJ 177 / 217 DTR 375 / 141 taxmann.com 126 /( 2023)103 ITR 580 (Pune)(Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Interest on receivables-Reduction of credit period to 30 days from 90 days by Dispute Resolution Panel-Service agreement with associated enterprise amended to 90 days-TPO to consider 90 days-Matter Remanded. [S. 92B (1)]

Outsourcepartners International Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2022)97 ITR 22 (SN) (Bang) (Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Corporate Guarantee Computation of commission at 0.5 percent-Justified [S. 92B]

Dy. CIT v. S. Kumars Nationwide Ltd. (2022) 97 ITR 60 (S.N.) (Mum) (Trib)