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. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Order passed without following the directions of DRP-Order was set aside. [S. 92C 144C(5)]

Olympus Medical Systems (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 194 ITD 676 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Failure to pass draft assessment order-Violation of procedure-Order set aside. [S. 144C(13), 271(1)(c)]

Cisco Systems Services B.V. v. DCIT(IT) (2022) 194 ITD 135 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Comparable-Distribution of products-Royalty paid by assessee would be within arm length range and impugned ALP adjustments were deleted-Merchandise and samples from its AE for resale in India-Resale Price Method (RPM) is Most Appropriate Method (MAM) to benchmark said international transaction.

Diesel Fashion India Reliance (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 194 ITD 296 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Working capital adjustments-Working capital adjustment to be allowed where TNMM used for calculation of ALP. [R. 10B]

Bharat Vijaykumar Jain (HUF) v. DCIT 194 ITD 288 / 94 ITR 122 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Comparables-Export filter-filter of 10 per cent as applied by assessee was most reasonable-Matter remanded.

Munjal Showa Ltd. v. JCIT (2022) 194 ITD 199 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Trading goods-Capitalised goods-Adjustment was deleted-Adjustment of interest-Delay in realization of invoices raised on AE-Matter remanded to the AO.

DHR Holding India (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 194 ITD 192 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 92BA : Transfer pricing-Domestic transactions-Vide amendment by Finance Act, 2017, clause 6) of section 92BA had been omitted from 1-4-2017, it would be deemed that clause 6 has never been on statute and since nothing was specified whether proceeding initiated or action taken on this would continue, proceeding initiated or action taken under that clause would not survive. [S. 92C]

Shahi Exports v. ACIT 194 ITD 177 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 80P : Co-operative societies-Letting of godown-Milk parlours cannot be considered as godowns or warehouses as contemplated under section 80P(2)(e) and hence, rental income derived from letting of milk parlours will not be eligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(e) of the Act. [S. 80P(2)(e)]

Hassan Co-operative Milk Producers Societies Union Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 194 ITD 522/ (2023) 222 TTJ 538 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 80P : Co-operative societies-Interest-Bank-Bank not being a co-operative society interest income could not be said to attributable to activities of co-operative society-Not eligible for deduction-Interest income reduced by administrative expenses and other proportionate expenses to earn said income had to be brought to tax as income from other sources. [S. 56, 57, 80P(2)(d)]

Krishnarajapet Taluk Agri Pro Co-op Marketing Society Ltd. v. PCIT (2022) 194 ITD 311 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 80IA : Industrial undertakings-Infrastructure development-Partnership firm-Executed works contract-Not eligible deduction [S. 800IA(4), 80IA(13)]

DCIT v. Eshwarnath Construction. (2022) 194 ITD 592 (Chennai) (Trib.)