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 :

        2018 (4) TMI 688 - 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

        ITAT directs detailed examination of Arm's Length Price using TNMM. Remand report sought for fair hearing. The ITAT remanded the case to the CIT(A) for a detailed examination of the Arm's Length Price (ALP) at the entity level using the Transactional Net Margin ...
                      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.

                          ITAT directs detailed examination of Arm's Length Price using TNMM. Remand report sought for fair hearing.

                          The ITAT remanded the case to the CIT(A) for a detailed examination of the Arm's Length Price (ALP) at the entity level using the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) and aggregating the transactions. The CIT(A) was directed to obtain a remand report from the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) and allow the assessee a fair hearing. The revenue's appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, stressing the importance of a thorough review of the aggregated transactions and the accuracy of the ALP determination.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Adjustment of license fee and management fees by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO).
                          2. Determination of Arm's Length Price (ALP) for international transactions.
                          3. Aggregation of transactions for Transfer Pricing (TP) analysis.
                          4. Commercial expediency and benefit test for intra-group services.
                          5. Jurisdiction of TPO and Assessing Officer (AO) in determining ALP and service benefits.

                          Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Adjustment of License Fee and Management Fees by the TPO:
                          The TPO proposed adjustments by treating the license fee and management fees as NIL, arguing that these payments suppressed profit margins and shifted profits to the Associated Enterprise (AE). The TPO adopted the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method instead of the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) used by the assessee and issued a show-cause notice questioning the necessity and benefit of these payments.

                          2. Determination of Arm's Length Price (ALP) for International Transactions:
                          The TPO's approach was to benchmark the license fee and management fees separately, concluding that these should be NIL. The assessee argued that these fees were intrinsic and interlinked with the main transaction of manufacturing and exporting pharmaceutical formulations, and hence, should not be benchmarked separately. The CIT(A) upheld the assessee's approach, noting that the operating profit margin was higher than that of comparable companies, indicating that the transactions were at arm's length.

                          3. Aggregation of Transactions for Transfer Pricing (TP) Analysis:
                          The CIT(A) and ITAT supported the aggregation of transactions, citing that closely linked transactions should be analyzed together. This approach is consistent with the OECD guidelines and Indian TP provisions, which allow for the aggregation of transactions emanating from a common source. The ITAT referenced the Delhi High Court's judgment in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication India (P.) Ltd. v. CIT, which permits the aggregation of transactions for TP analysis.

                          4. Commercial Expediency and Benefit Test for Intra-Group Services:
                          The TPO questioned the commercial expediency and benefit of the license fee and management fees, suggesting that no tangible benefit was derived from these payments. However, the ITAT emphasized that the benefit test should be viewed from the taxpayer's perspective and that the TPO cannot question the commercial wisdom of the taxpayer. The ITAT cited various judgments, including EKL Appliances and Dresser Rand, which held that the necessity or prudence of an expenditure is not for the revenue authorities to decide.

                          5. Jurisdiction of TPO and Assessing Officer (AO) in Determining ALP and Service Benefits:
                          The ITAT clarified that the TPO's role is to determine the ALP of international transactions and not to decide whether a service was necessary or beneficial for the taxpayer. This distinction was highlighted in the case of Dresser-Rand India Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, where it was noted that the AO, not the TPO, should determine the factual existence and benefit of services under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act.

                          Conclusion:
                          The ITAT remanded the issue to the CIT(A) for a detailed examination of the ALP at the entity level by applying the TNMM method and aggregating the transactions. The ITAT directed the CIT(A) to obtain a remand report from the TPO and provide the assessee with an adequate opportunity to be heard. The appeals filed by the revenue were allowed for statistical purposes, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive analysis of the aggregated transactions and the correctness of the ALP determination.
                          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