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
  • 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>Tribunal Upholds CIT(A)'s Segment Reporting Decision, Rejects ALP Adjustment</h1> <h3>ACIT, Circle-2 (2), Kolkata Versus M/s Netguru Ltd.</h3> ACIT, Circle-2 (2), Kolkata Versus M/s Netguru Ltd. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.2. Acceptance of segment reporting by the assessee company.3. Justification of the segmental accounts considering the nature of the business.4. Determination of Arm's Length Price (ALP) adjustment.Detailed Analysis:1. Condonation of Delay:The Revenue's appeal for the assessment year 2011-12 was barred by a 9-day delay. The Tribunal, after hearing both parties and considering the reasons provided, condoned the delay and admitted the appeal for hearing.2. Acceptance of Segment Reporting:The Revenue contested the acceptance of segment reporting by the CIT(A), arguing it was not part of the audited accounts and did not consider the nature of the business. The assessee, Net Guru Limited, provided segment reporting to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for the application of the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM). The segment reporting, verified by an independent statutory auditor, distinguished between transactions with the associated enterprise (AE) and independent customers. The Tribunal noted that the assessee was classified as a 'Small and Medium Sized Company' (SMC) and thus not mandated to disclose segment information in audited financial statements as per Accounting Standard (AS)-17. The Tribunal referenced various judicial precedents affirming that segmental results need not be part of audited accounts and should be accepted if maintained in the ordinary course of business. Consequently, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue's allegation and upheld the CIT(A)'s acceptance of the segment reporting.3. Justification of Segmental Accounts:The Revenue argued that the assessee was engaged in only one activity, software development, and thus segmental accounts should be rejected. The Tribunal found that the assessee was involved in seven different revenue-generating activities, including software development, engineering services, CD sales, digital media sales, website development, and 'Gift Online' services. The Tribunal noted that the segment reporting was prepared to compute the net profit indicator for the international transaction under consideration. The Tribunal referenced judicial precedents supporting the acceptance of segmental results for transfer pricing analysis. Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's ground, accepting the segment reporting provided by the assessee.4. Determination of ALP Adjustment:The TPO had rejected the segment reporting and applied the TNMM at the entity level, leading to an upward ALP adjustment of INR 83,60,749/-. The CIT(A) deleted this adjustment, and the Revenue appealed. The Tribunal noted that the TPO's approach of considering the entity level net profit indicator was against the basic tenets of Indian Transfer Pricing Laws, which mandate comparing the net profit margin realized from the international transaction with comparable uncontrolled transactions. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, accepting the segment reporting and rejecting the TPO's entity-level approach. The Tribunal concluded that the ALP adjustment made by the TPO/AO was not justified and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue, upholding the CIT(A)'s acceptance of the segment reporting and rejecting the ALP adjustment made by the TPO/AO. The Tribunal emphasized the proper application of the TNMM and the relevance of segmental results in transfer pricing analysis.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found