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 (12) TMI 583 - HC - 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

        Court affirms ITAT decisions favoring assessee in tax appeal, grants benefits under Section 92B The court upheld the ITAT's decisions in favor of the assessee, dismissing the department's appeals and allowing the assessee's appeal and ...
                      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.

                          Court affirms ITAT decisions favoring assessee in tax appeal, grants benefits under Section 92B

                          The court upheld the ITAT's decisions in favor of the assessee, dismissing the department's appeals and allowing the assessee's appeal and cross-objection. It affirmed the ITAT's deletion of certain additions, granting benefits under Section 92B for international transactions. The court ruled that adjustments for notional interest income and guarantee charges were correctly deleted, emphasizing the proper application of the law. Additionally, it held that the adjustment for interest-free loans should be based on the prevailing LIBOR rate without an additional 2% ad hoc adjustment, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Justification of ITAT in deleting additions without considering the retrospective amendment in Section 92B.
                          2. Justification of ITAT in deleting adjustments on account of notional interest income due to delay in collection of sales proceeds from associated enterprises.
                          3. Applicability of adjustment at prevailing LIBOR rate plus 2% on interest-free loans provided to associated enterprises.
                          4. Justification of ITAT in deleting the adjustment for notional guarantee charges for corporate and bank guarantees given by the assessee.

                          Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                          Issue 1: Justification of ITAT in Deleting Additions Without Considering Retrospective Amendment in Section 92B
                          The appellant challenged the ITAT's decision to delete certain additions without considering the amendment in Section 92B, which was inserted with retrospective effect from 1.4.2002. The court referred to the Hyderabad Tribunal's decision in Four Soft Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, which clarified that corporate guarantees fall within the scope of 'international transaction' as per the amended Section 92B. The court concluded that the ITAT correctly applied the law and granted benefit under Section 92B to the assessee, thus upholding the tribunal's decision.

                          Issue 2: Justification of ITAT in Deleting Adjustments on Account of Notional Interest Income
                          The ITAT had directed the deletion of adjustments related to notional interest income due to delays in collecting sales proceeds from associated enterprises. The court observed that the tribunal's decision was consistent with the interpretation of international transactions under Section 92B. The court upheld the ITAT's decision, stating that the tribunal had acted justly and properly in granting the benefit to the assessee.

                          Issue 3: Applicability of Adjustment at Prevailing LIBOR Rate Plus 2% on Interest-Free Loans Provided to Associated Enterprises
                          The appellant contended that the adjustment of interest-free loans to associated enterprises should be based on the prevailing LIBOR rate plus 2%. The court referred to the Delhi High Court's decision in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Cotton Naturals (I) Pvt. Ltd., which held that the LIBOR rate should be the benchmark for international transactions involving foreign currency loans. The court concluded that the addition of an ad hoc 2% was unjustified and arbitrary, thus quashing the addition and ruling in favor of the assessee.

                          Issue 4: Justification of ITAT in Deleting Adjustment for Notional Guarantee Charges
                          The ITAT had deleted the adjustment for notional guarantee charges for corporate and bank guarantees given by the assessee on behalf of its associated enterprises. The court referred to the Bombay High Court's decision in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Everest Kento Cylinders Ltd., which distinguished between corporate guarantees and bank guarantees. The court agreed with the tribunal's view that the considerations for corporate guarantees are distinct from those for bank guarantees and upheld the deletion of the adjustment.

                          Conclusion:
                          The court answered all the issues in favor of the assessee and against the department. The appeals filed by the department were dismissed, and the appeal and cross-objection filed by the assessee were allowed. The court upheld the ITAT's decisions, emphasizing the proper application of Section 92B and the appropriate use of the LIBOR rate for international transactions.
                          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