Just a moment...

Top
Help
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
×

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>ITAT Orders TPO to Reassess Comparables for Accurate Arm's Length Price in TV Channel Distribution Case.</h1> <h3>Star Den Media Services Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT Range-11 (1) Mumbai</h3> The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeals for A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11, instructing the TPO to reassess the comparables in alignment with the assessee's ... TP adjustment - Comparable selection - assessee has adopted TNMM to be the most appropriate method to benchmark the transaction with OP/TR as the PLI and with the Assessee as the tested party. The assessee has an entity level PLI working of 0.74% - HELD THAT:- Identical issue was decided in the case of Turner International India P. Ltd. [2018 (8) TMI 259 - ITAT DELHI] has sufficient cogency. The business activity of the assessee in that case was marketing and distribution of satellite TV channels. Akin to that the assessee in the present case is also involved in distribution of various Star as well as third party channels in India. In such circumstances, selection of comparables engaged in software distributor has been accepted by the ITAT. Accordingly, we accept the submission of learned counsel and direct the TPO to examine his submission that if the comparables finally accepted by the ITAT in the case of Turner International India P. Ltd. are taken into account and the comparables of the assessee are selected with reference to it the margin should be accepted if they are plus and minus 5%. Needless to add assessee should be provided adequate opportunity. Issues:Transfer pricing adjustment by the TPO for A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Transfer Pricing Adjustment for A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11The judgment deals with the appeals by the assessee against the orders of the Assessing Officer passed pursuant to the direction of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) for A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11. The common issue raised was regarding the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) making an adjustment of Rs. 429,611,231 for A.Y. 2009-10 and Rs. 2,88,54,506 for A.Y. 2010-11. The facts and figures for A.Y. 2009-10 were referred to due to their similarity with the subsequent year. The assessee, a joint venture between two entities, was involved in distributing television channels in India. The international transactions reported by the assessee included obtaining licenses for distribution of channels and providing services in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.Issue 2: Determination of Arm's Length Price (ALP)The assessee aggregated the international transactions for benchmarking purposes, claiming similarity in functions and efforts expended. The transfer pricing report documented that the transactions were similar in nature with minor variations in arrangement terms. Due to the inability to segregate profits, an entity-level TNMM approach was adopted. The TPO, however, was not satisfied with the comparables selected by the assessee, particularly software distributors, as he believed they did not perform similar functions. The TPO made adjustments based on the comparables he selected, resulting in transfer pricing adjustments for both A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11.Issue 3: ITAT's DecisionThe ITAT, after hearing both parties, considered the submissions and previous decisions. It noted that the issue was similar to a case decided by the ITAT Delhi Bench involving marketing and distribution of satellite TV channels. The ITAT accepted the selection of software distributors as comparables, as in the previous case, and directed the TPO to reevaluate the comparables based on this criterion. The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeals, emphasizing the importance of selecting comparables that align with the nature of the assessee's business activities.In conclusion, the ITAT allowed the assessee's appeals for both A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11, directing the TPO to reconsider the comparables based on the nature of the assessee's business activities to determine the Arm's Length Price.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found