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 :

        2017 (4) TMI 45 - 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

        Tax Tribunal rejects Commissioner's jurisdiction assumption under Section 263, upholds assessee's Section 10A deduction. The Tribunal held that the Commissioner of Income Tax's assumption of jurisdiction under Section 263 was not justified. The Tribunal emphasized that the ...
                      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.

                          Tax Tribunal rejects Commissioner's jurisdiction assumption under Section 263, upholds assessee's Section 10A deduction.

                          The Tribunal held that the Commissioner of Income Tax's assumption of jurisdiction under Section 263 was not justified. The Tribunal emphasized that the Commissioner could not invoke Section 263 merely based on having a different opinion. The Tribunal also noted that the Commissioner's directions for a fresh search and comparison of profit margins were not warranted. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order and allowed the assessee's appeal, confirming the deduction under Section 10A in its entirety.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
                          2. Invocation of Section 10A(7) read with Section 80IA(10) of the Income-tax Act.
                          3. Comparison of operating profit margins between different service segments.
                          4. Adherence to Transfer Pricing provisions.

                          Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961:
                          The main issue in the appeal is whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) correctly assumed jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act. The CIT considered the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The CIT's jurisdiction under Section 263 is based on the satisfaction that the order of the Assessing Officer (AO) is erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue. The fundamental principles for invoking Section 263 include incorrect assumptions of facts or law, orders passed without application of mind, or when the AO's view is unsustainable under law.

                          2. Invocation of Section 10A(7) read with Section 80IA(10) of the Income-tax Act:
                          The CIT invoked Section 10A(7) read with Section 80IA(10) on the grounds that the assessee earned more than ordinary profits from its Engineering Design and Development Services. The CIT believed that the AO failed to apply these provisions, leading to an erroneous and prejudicial order. The CIT directed the AO to revise the assessment by applying these provisions, arguing that the high-profit margins indicated an arrangement to yield more than ordinary profits, which warranted restricting the deduction under Section 10A.

                          3. Comparison of operating profit margins between different service segments:
                          The CIT compared the operating profit margins of the Engineering Design and Development Services (270% on total cost) with the Business Support Services (7.39% on total cost). The CIT argued that the AO should have applied the provisions of Section 10A(7) read with Section 80IA(10) due to the significant difference in profit margins. The assessee contended that the two services were not comparable due to their distinct nature and that the high-profit margins in the Engineering Design Services were justified by the complexity and controlled costs of the services provided.

                          4. Adherence to Transfer Pricing provisions:
                          The Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) had accepted the margins shown by the assessee for the Engineering Design and Development Services under the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method, without making any adjustments. The CIT noted that the AO did not apply his mind to the provisions of Section 10A(7) read with Section 80IA(10), despite the TPO's findings. The assessee argued that the TPO's acceptance of the margins indicated that the transactions were at arm's length, and there was no basis for the CIT's invocation of Section 263.

                          Conclusion:
                          The Tribunal held that the CIT's assumption of jurisdiction under Section 263 was not justified. The AO had verified the claim of deduction under Section 10A, and the TPO had accepted the margins shown by the assessee. The Tribunal emphasized that the CIT could not invoke Section 263 merely because he had a different opinion. The Tribunal also noted that the CIT's directions for a fresh search and comparison of profit margins were not warranted. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT's order and allowed the assessee's appeal, confirming the deduction under Section 10A in its entirety.
                          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