Maruti Suzuki India Ltd vs Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 1 July, 2010
The
decision of jurisdictional High Court in Maruti Suzuki
(supra) holds the legal front and ratio laid down therein
has to be followed.
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.40 seconds)Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii on 11 February, 2016
8. We also find that the judgments of the
Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony
Ericsson Mobile Communications Pvt Ltd (supra)
and Maruti Suziki India Limited (supra) are also
considered while remanding the above case (M/s.
Jhonson and Jhonson) to the file of the AO for
necessary adjudication. With similar directions,
we remand Ground no.2 with its sub-grounds of
the present appeal to the file of the AO for
benchmarking the relevant international
transactions. Accordingly, Ground no.2 with its
sub-grounds raised by the assessee are allowed
for statistical purposes.
Section 92B in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs The Additional Commissioner Of Income ... on 23 December, 2015
Recently, the Hon'ble Delhi High
Court, subsequent to the said (In ITA No.
944/Del/2016) decision of Maruti Suzuki India
Ltd. (Supra), examined this aspect and applied the
same principle to the distribution business also in
the cases of Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) Pvt.
Ltd. vs. A.C.I.T. (Supra) and C.I.T. & Ors vs.
Whirlpool of India Ltd. (supra) vide order dated
23.12.2015 and 22.12.2015 respectively. These
decisions of the Hon'ble Jurisidctional Court which
are applicable to the facts of the present case were
24
I.T.A. 3811/D/09 & 3525/Del/09
I.T.A. 2770/D/11, 2530/D/11
Assessment year 2004-05, 05-06
not considered by the T.P.O. and the D.R.P. since
these were not available to them. We, therefore, by
considering the totality of the facts and the ratio
laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the
aforesaid judicial pronouncements, deem it
appreciate to set aside the issue relating to the
adjustment on account of AMP to the file of the
TPO/AO to be decided afresh in accordance with
the law after providing due and reasonable
opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Shri Manoj Aggarwal, Bemco Jewellers ... vs Dcit on 25 July, 2008
7. We have heard both the parties and perused
the orders of the Revenue Authorities as well as
the relevant material placed before us. We have
considered the submissions of the Ld Counsel that
under the factual matrix of this case, the issue of
benchmarking the AMP transactions was
remanded in the case of M/s. Johnson & Johnson
Limited (supra) and judgment of the Hon‟ble Delhi
High Court in the case of Perfetti Van Melle India
27
I.T.A. 3811/D/09 & 3525/Del/09
I.T.A. 2770/D/11, 2530/D/11
Assessment year 2004-05, 05-06
Pvt Ltd vs. DCIT in ITANo.407/Del/2015 (AY
2010-2011), dated 2.6.2015.
Section 115JB in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Casio India Company Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs Dcit, New Delhi on 3 April, 2017
Therefore, we find that it is fair to give
an opportunity to the TPO / AO to apply the ratio
of the said judgment and others, if any, and
remand this issue to the file of the AO considering
the plethora of orders of the Tribunal referred
above ie the case of Toshiba India (P) Ltd vs. DCIT
(supra); (ii) Casio India Co. (P) Ltd vs. DCIT (supra);
Commissioner Of Income Tax (Ltu) vs M/S. Whirlpool Of India Ltd. on 30 September, 2016
Recently, the Hon'ble Delhi High
Court, subsequent to the said (In ITA No.
944/Del/2016) decision of Maruti Suzuki India
Ltd. (Supra), examined this aspect and applied the
same principle to the distribution business also in
the cases of Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) Pvt.
Ltd. vs. A.C.I.T. (Supra) and C.I.T. & Ors vs.
Whirlpool of India Ltd. (supra) vide order dated
23.12.2015 and 22.12.2015 respectively. These
decisions of the Hon'ble Jurisidctional Court which
are applicable to the facts of the present case were
24
I.T.A. 3811/D/09 & 3525/Del/09
I.T.A. 2770/D/11, 2530/D/11
Assessment year 2004-05, 05-06
not considered by the T.P.O. and the D.R.P. since
these were not available to them. We, therefore, by
considering the totality of the facts and the ratio
laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the
aforesaid judicial pronouncements, deem it
appreciate to set aside the issue relating to the
adjustment on account of AMP to the file of the
TPO/AO to be decided afresh in accordance with
the law after providing due and reasonable
opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Espn Software India (P) Ltd., Gurgaon vs Dcit (Ltu), New Delhi on 8 February, 2017
Therefore, we find that it is fair to give
an opportunity to the TPO / AO to apply the ratio
of the said judgment and others, if any, and
remand this issue to the file of the AO considering
the plethora of orders of the Tribunal referred
above ie the case of Toshiba India (P) Ltd vs. DCIT
(supra); (ii) Casio India Co. (P) Ltd vs. DCIT (supra);