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
  • 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
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    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>High Court overturns ITAT's remand decision on international transactions, stresses thorough review on merits</h1> <h3>BACARDI INDIA PVT. LTD. Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX</h3> The High Court set aside the ITAT's decision to remand a case concerning international transactions related to AMP expenses and arm's length price ... Existence of international transaction concerning the advertisement marketing and promotion (AMP) expenses - determination of the arm's length price - ITAT remanding the issues to the Transfer Pricing Officer for a fresh consideration - Held that:- Case before ITAT was argued at length and the views of the TPO as well as the Dispute Resolution Panel (‘DRP’) were already available to the ITAT. Arguments were advanced on the strength of judgments of this Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [2015 (3) TMI 580 - DELHI HIGH COURT] as well as a string of subsequent judgments beginning with Maruti Suzuki India Ltd v. CIT [2015 (12) TMI 634 - DELHI HIGH COURT] Main reason that weighed with the ITAT to remand the matter to the TPO was that the TPO did not have the benefit of the above decisions of this Court when the order was initially passed by the TPO is not acceptable as it can hardly be a ground for remanding the entire matter to the TPO. In fact, this was anticipated by this Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd.(supra)it cautioned that the ITAT should not simply remand the matter to the TPO but examine it itself, particularly when the facts have already been analysed and considered and no new facts have emerged in the meanwhile. In the present case, all the facts necessary for the ITAT to form an opinion on the issues before it concerning the AMP expenditure were already before it. Remand to the TPO of the entire matter for a decision afresh appears to be unwarranted. Appeal before the ITAT is restored to its file for a decision on merits. Issues:Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - Existence of international transaction concerning AMP expenses and determination of arm's length price - Remand to Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for fresh consideration.Analysis:The appeal before the High Court concerned the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in relation to the Assessment Year 2011-12. The primary issue raised was whether the ITAT should have dealt with the matter concerning the existence of international transactions related to Advertisement, Marketing, and Promotion (AMP) expenses and the determination of the arm's length price, instead of remanding the issue to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for fresh consideration.The Court observed that the case had been extensively argued before the ITAT, with the views of the TPO and the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) already available. Arguments were presented based on previous judgments, including the one in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and subsequent cases like Maruti Suzuki India Ltd v. CIT.Despite the ITAT's decision to remand the matter to the TPO due to the latter not having the benefit of certain court decisions at the time of the initial order, the High Court found this reasoning insufficient. Citing the Sony Ericsson case, the Court emphasized that the ITAT should not merely remand matters to the TPO without proper examination, especially when all necessary facts are already on record and no new developments have occurred.Consequently, the High Court set aside the ITAT's order to remand the matter to the TPO, deeming it unwarranted. The appeal was restored to the ITAT for a decision on merits in accordance with the law. The case was scheduled for further proceedings before the ITAT on a specified date. Ultimately, the appeal was disposed of based on the above terms, emphasizing the need for a thorough examination of the issues at hand without unnecessary remands.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found