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.
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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2015 (3) TMI 9 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        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

        Appeal allowed for statistical purposes; Tribunal directs re-examination of financials. Importance of detailed analysis stressed. The appeal was treated as allowed for statistical purposes. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer/Transfer Pricing Officer to re-examine and verify ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Appeal allowed for statistical purposes; Tribunal directs re-examination of financials. Importance of detailed analysis stressed.

                          The appeal was treated as allowed for statistical purposes. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer/Transfer Pricing Officer to re-examine and verify the segmental financials and credit periods. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of conducting a detailed and fair analysis of segmental details and internal comparables in transfer pricing adjustments. The issues related to the levy of interest under Sections 234B and 234C were deemed consequential, with directions for the AO/TPO to provide consequential relief based on the final determination of the transfer pricing adjustments.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Addition on account of Transfer Pricing (TP) adjustment for international transactions involving IT/ITES services.
                          2. Addition on account of TP adjustment for interest attributable to the excess credit period allowed to Associated Enterprises (AEs).
                          3. Levy of interest under Sections 234B and 234C.

                          Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Addition on account of Transfer Pricing (TP) adjustment for international transactions involving IT/ITES services:

                          The assessee, a company providing data clearing, financial settlement, and back-end support services, filed an appeal against the order of the Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax Circle 16(2), Hyderabad. The dispute centered on the addition of Rs. 2,61,64,283 made by the Assessing Officer/TPO for TP adjustments concerning international transactions with AEs for IT/ITES services.

                          The assessee had submitted a TP Study Report using the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) with Operating Profit to Operating Cost (OP/OC) as the Price Level Indicator (PLI). The TPO rejected this report, citing defects in the method of selecting comparables and the use of unaudited segmental results. The TPO then conducted his own analysis, selecting 18 comparables with an Arithmetic Mean of OP/OC at 22.69%.

                          The TPO recalculated the OP/OC for the assessee's international transactions at 15.73%, leading to a TP adjustment of Rs. 1,15,27,299. After objections from the assessee, the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) directed the exclusion of Infosys Technologies Ltd. from the comparables, reducing the TP adjustment to Rs. 1,00,97,458.

                          The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's contention that segmental details should not be rejected merely because they were unaudited. It emphasized the need for the TPO to examine the allocation of direct and indirect expenses and to make adjustments if the segmental financials were found reliable. The issue was remitted back to the AO/TPO for fresh examination and verification of the segmental financials.

                          2. Addition on account of TP adjustment for interest attributable to the excess credit period allowed to Associated Enterprises (AEs):

                          The AO/TPO noted that the assessee had receivables of Rs. 8,41,67,205 from its AEs and allowed an excessive credit period. The TPO, referencing the Tribunal's decision in Logix Micro Systems Ltd., considered one month as a reasonable credit period and calculated interest for the delay, resulting in a TP adjustment of Rs. 1,60,66,825.

                          The Tribunal observed that the TPO did not provide a basis for considering one month as a reasonable credit period. It suggested using internal comparables, i.e., the average credit period offered by the assessee to non-AEs, as a benchmark. The issue was remitted back to the AO/TPO to verify the average credit period for non-AE transactions and compare it with the AE transactions, providing the assessee an opportunity for a hearing.

                          3. Levy of interest under Sections 234B and 234C:

                          The issues related to the levy of interest under Sections 234B and 234C were deemed consequential. The Assessing Officer was directed to allow consequential relief to the assessee based on the final determination of the TP adjustments.

                          Conclusion:

                          The appeal was treated as allowed for statistical purposes, with directions for the AO/TPO to re-examine and verify the segmental financials and credit periods, and to provide consequential relief regarding interest levies. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a detailed and fair analysis of the segmental details and internal comparables in TP adjustments.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found