Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 21 (0.30 seconds)Section 92B in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Finance Act, 2012
Section 92 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 37 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 92CA in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
M/S. New Delhi Television Ltd., New ... vs Dcit, New Delhi on 14 July, 2017
Ltd. vs ACIT (2017) 140 ITD 41 (Special Bench), it was held
by the Assessing Officer/TPO that the said expenditure on AMP
Page | 15
आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No:- 1423/Del/2015
expenditure was an international transaction and since it fails the
BLT test and also because the AE did not reimburse any part of the
expenditure, then the said expenditure had to be benchmarked with
markup.
Acit, New Delhi vs Kobelco Construction Equipment India ... on 17 April, 2017
In this regard, we find support from the ratio
laid down by the M/s. Celio Future Fashion Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and
Kobelco Construction Equipment India Ltd. (supra). The RPM method
identifies the price at which product purchased from the AE is resold
to unrelated party; then in the case of resellers, who do not alter the
tangible goods and services or use any intangible assets to add
substantial value to the property or services i.e. resale is made
without any value addition, then in such facts and circumstances,
RPM method is to be applied as method to benchmark the
international transaction undertaken. We hold so and allow the
ground raised by the assessee on this issue. The Assessing Officer is
directed to apply the RPM method in order to benchmark the
international transaction undertaken by the assessee in the
distribution segment, after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing
to the assessee. We only adjudicating Ground No.6 and all other
grounds raised by the assessee in this regard, are not adjudicated, on
the ground that the assessee itself had pleaded that the balance
grounds of appeal would become academic in case Ground No.6 and
the issue on AMP expenses is allowed in the case of the assessee.
M/S.Ao Smith India Water Products Pvt. ... vs Acit- Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore on 12 September, 2018
40. We find that similar issue arose before the Pune Bench of the
Tribunal in Nalco Water India Ltd. vs ACIT in ITA No.742/Pun/2017,
relating to Assessment Year 2012-13 order dated 06.09.2019 wherein
intention to pay subvention amount was for limited period so as to
ensure that the assessee therein did not become sick company. The
assessee therein had also offered the said subsidy as taxable in its
hands as noted by para 9 of order. Coming to the treatment of the
subvention /subsidy received by the assessee from its parent
company and whether the said subvention amount was operating in
nature and the same had to be included as receipt in the hands of the
assessee, while computing the PLI for the year under consideration, it
was held as under:-
Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs Addl. Cit, New Delhi on 17 October, 2018
The Hon'ble High Court in Maruti Suzuki
(supra) first addressed the preliminary issue on account of decision of
Sony Ericsson (supra) that it would be open to Maruti Suzuki (supra)
to question the existence of international transaction involving it and
its AE. The contention of the Special Counsel for the Revenue in
Maruti Suzuki (supra) was that as far as the decision of Sony
Ericsson (supra) was concerned, it did not distinguish the case of the
manufacturer from those of the distributors accept observing that
Page | 21
आयकर अपील सं.