Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court excludes stock obsolescence provision from operating margin calculation, rules in favor of Assessee.</h1> The court ruled in favor of the Assessee on all issues. The provision for stock obsolescence was excluded from the net operating expenditure for ... Determining the net operating margin - Provision for stock obsolescence/inventory be excluded from the net operating expenditure of the Assessee for since it was an abnormal and extraordinary expenditure - adjustment to the value of import of raw materials - Held that:- Court is unable to discern any legal infirmity in the approach of the CIT (A) which was upheld by the ITAT in the impugned order. It is sought to be suggested that the Assessee makes a provision for stock obsolescence year after year and, therefore, this could not be treated as ‘extraordinary’ or ‘non-recurring’. However, when one peruses the order of the CIT (A) it is seen that the question was not whether the Assessee was claiming it only as a one-time measure but whether it was gaining any undue advantage in using this device as a measure for avoiding tax. Ultimately, the entire exercise of determining ALP for international transactions is to ensure that there is no avoidance of tax by an Assessee by resorting to an accounting device. The Court is unable to hold that the provision made for stock obsolescence by the Assessee resulted in any undue advantage to it. The comparability analysis undertaken by the CIT (A) which has been affirmed by the ITAT does not suffer from any legal infirmity. No substantial question of law arises Issues:1. Whether provision for stock obsolescence should be excluded from the net operating expenditure for determining the net operating margin.2. Whether the international transactions between the Assessee and its associated enterprise were at arm's length.3. Whether the provision for stock obsolescence was abnormal and extraordinary in nature.4. Whether the Assessee gained any undue advantage in using the provision for stock obsolescence as a measure for avoiding tax.Analysis:1. The primary issue in this case revolved around whether the provision for stock obsolescence should be excluded from the net operating expenditure for determining the net operating margin. The CIT (A) accepted the plea of the Assessee that the provision for stock obsolescence should be excluded since it was abnormal and extraordinary in nature. The CIT (A) analyzed the stock obsolescence to sales ratio for comparable companies and found that the provision for stock obsolescence was significantly higher for the Assessee compared to its comparables. The CIT (A) concluded that the provision for stock obsolescence needed to be excluded for computing the operating margin of the Assessee, aligning with the principle that abnormal expenses should not be included in determining operating margin.2. Another issue addressed in the judgment was whether the international transactions between the Assessee and its associated enterprise were at arm's length. The Assessee applied the Transactional Net Margin Method and contended that the operating margin on operating income was higher than the mean of the weighted average margins earned by comparables, indicating that the transactions were at arm's length. The TPO, however, re-computed the net operating margin and made adjustments, leading to a downward adjustment in the value of imports. The CIT (A) and ITAT upheld the Assessee's position, affirming that the international transactions were at arm's length.3. The question of whether the provision for stock obsolescence was abnormal and extraordinary in nature was extensively discussed in the judgment. The CIT (A) compared the provision for stock obsolescence of the Assessee with that of comparable companies and found a significant difference, particularly noting that only one comparable company had a similar provision. The CIT (A) concluded that the provision for stock obsolescence was abnormal and extraordinary, justifying its exclusion from the operating margin calculation of the Assessee.4. Lastly, the judgment addressed the issue of whether the Assessee gained any undue advantage in using the provision for stock obsolescence as a measure for avoiding tax. The Court examined the purpose of determining the arm's length price for international transactions, emphasizing the prevention of tax avoidance through accounting devices. The Court found no legal infirmity in the comparability analysis conducted by the CIT (A) and upheld by the ITAT, dismissing the argument that the provision for stock obsolescence resulted in undue tax advantage for the Assessee.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found