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 :

        2022 (2) TMI 1350 - 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

        Tribunal decision: royalty adjustment deleted, warranty provision remanded. Revenue's appeal dismissed. Arm's length price upheld. The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal by directing the deletion of the royalty adjustment and remanding the warranty provision issue for ...
                      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.

                          Tribunal decision: royalty adjustment deleted, warranty provision remanded. Revenue's appeal dismissed. Arm's length price upheld.

                          The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal by directing the deletion of the royalty adjustment and remanding the warranty provision issue for verification. The revenue's appeal was dismissed as the Tribunal upheld the combined transaction approach for determining the arm's length price, including royalty payments.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. General Grounds of Appeal
                          2. Transfer Pricing - Legal Issues
                          3. Aggregation of Transactions including Royalty Paid
                          4. Computation of ALP of Manufacturing Segment
                          5. Corporate Tax Grounds
                          6. Interest under Section 234B

                          Detailed Analysis:

                          General Grounds of Appeal:
                          1. General Grounds: The assessee contended that the order of the CIT(A) was prejudicial and bad in law. They argued that the AO and TPO erred in passing orders without providing sufficient opportunity to be heard and at the end of the limitation period. These grounds were not specifically argued and thus do not require detailed adjudication.

                          Transfer Pricing - Legal Issues:
                          2. Transfer Pricing Reference: The assessee argued that the AO erred in referring the determination of the arm's length price (ALP) to the TPO without proper justification. The CIT(A) confirmed the AO's action. However, these grounds were deemed academic and were not argued by the Ld.AR.

                          Aggregation of Transactions including Royalty Paid:
                          3. Combined Transaction Approach: The assessee adopted the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) at the entity level, including royalty payments in operating expenditure. The TPO separated manufacturing and trading segments but later scrutinized the royalty transaction separately, determining the ALP of royalty at NIL using the CUP method. The CIT(A) disagreed with the TPO's determination of NIL ALP but remanded the matter back to the TPO for identifying suitable comparables.

                          4. Judicial Precedents: The Tribunal referenced the Delhi High Court's judgment in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India (P.) Ltd. v CIT, which supports the "bundled approach" for closely linked transactions. The Tribunal also noted its own previous decisions in the assessee's favor, emphasizing that once the net profit margin is at arm's length, individual transactions like royalty need not be separately benchmarked.

                          5. Conclusion: The Tribunal directed the AO/TPO to delete the adjustment proposed for royalty as a separate international transaction, following the principle that the combined transaction approach should be upheld.

                          Computation of ALP of Manufacturing Segment:
                          6. Customs Duty Adjustment and Comparables: The assessee argued for customs duty adjustments and contested the rejection of certain comparables. However, since the TPO had already held the manufacturing and trading segments to be at arm's length, this issue was deemed academic for the year under consideration.

                          Corporate Tax Grounds:
                          7. Provision for Warranty: The assessee contended that the provision for warranty should not be added back to book profits under section 115JB, arguing that it was a real and ascertainable liability. The Tribunal referred to the Karnataka High Court's decision in the assessee's own case, which supported the allowance of warranty provisions as deductions. The Tribunal remanded the issue back to the AO for verification to ensure no double deduction was claimed.

                          8. Interest under Section 234B: This issue was not specifically addressed in the detailed analysis provided.

                          Revenue’s Appeal:
                          9. ALP of Royalty Payment: The revenue contested the CIT(A)'s direction to the TPO to identify suitable comparables for royalty payments. However, since the Tribunal deleted the adjustment for royalty proposed by the TPO, the revenue's appeal was dismissed.

                          Conclusion:
                          - The assessee's appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal directing the deletion of the royalty adjustment and remanding the warranty provision issue for verification.
                          - The revenue's appeal was dismissed as the Tribunal upheld the combined transaction approach for determining the ALP, including royalty payments.
                          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