TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court affirms Tribunal decision on CUP method, deletion of addition.</h1> The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision on the non-applicability of the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method and deletion of an addition related to ... TPA - ALP determination - non-applicability of CUP method - comparability - Held that:- Companies functionally dissimilar with of assessee need to deselected from final list. See THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALWAR. VERSUS M/S SAKATA INX (INDIA) LIMITED [2017 (7) TMI 1161 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] Finding of the comparable to be adopted to determine the ALP as the basis of the activity conducted by the respondent-assessee is essentially a finding of fact. The view taken by the Tribunal is a reasonable and possible view. No substantial question of law. See CIT ALWAR VERSUS M/S SAKATA INX (INDIA) LTD [2017 (5) TMI 1586 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] Issues:Challenge to Tribunal's judgment upholding non-applicability of CUP method and deletion of addition made on account of adjustment of Arm's Length Price of international transaction.Analysis:The appellant challenged the Tribunal's decision regarding the non-applicability of the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method and the deletion of an addition made on account of adjusting the Arm's Length Price of an international transaction. The appellant contended that the Tribunal erred in upholding the non-applicability of the CUP method and deleting the addition. However, the issue was found to be covered by a previous decision of the Court in a similar case. The Court referred to the decision in another case involving the same assessee, where the issue had been extensively discussed and decided upon. The Court analyzed the details provided by the appellant regarding the identification of comparables and related party transactions. The Court examined specific companies identified for benchmarking in the manufacturing and distribution functions, considering factors such as product similarity and related party transactions.The Court reviewed the arguments presented by both parties, with the appellant contending that the Tribunal erred in its decision. The respondent relied on previous decisions of the Bombay High Court to support their position. The Court discussed the findings of the Tribunal in similar cases involving the selection of comparables to determine the Arm's Length Price (ALP) of services provided. The Court emphasized that the selection of comparables is a factual determination and upheld the Tribunal's decision as reasonable and not perverse. The Court also referenced a decision involving a similar issue where the Tribunal's decision was supported based on the selection of comparables.Ultimately, the Court resolved both issues in favor of the assessee and against the department. The Court concluded that no substantial question of law arose from the appeal and dismissed the case accordingly.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
