TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>ITAT allows withdrawal of transfer pricing grounds after MAP resolution under Rule 44G(6), partly allows Section 14A appeal</h1> <h3>Unilever Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus DCIT, Range-1 (3) (2) Mumbai</h3> Unilever Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus DCIT, Range-1 (3) (2) Mumbai - TMI Issues:1. Transfer Pricing Adjustment on account of allocation of Royalty earned by Unilever2. Disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961Detailed Analysis:1. Transfer Pricing Adjustment on account of allocation of Royalty earned by Unilever:The appeal was against the Assessing Officer's order related to the allocation of royalty earned by Unilever to the assessee company for providing scientific and technical services. Grounds 2 to 6 raised issues regarding significant functions performed by the assessee, arm's length pricing, and allocation of gross royalty. The assessee applied for resolution under Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) with the UK, leading to the withdrawal of these grounds based on a CBDT letter dated 11.10.2023. The DR did not object, and the grounds were dismissed. This issue was resolved through the MAP process, resulting in the withdrawal of the TP grounds by the assessee.2. Disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961:Grounds 7 to 12 challenged the AO's disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D concerning tax-free dividend income. The assessee argued for restricting the disallowance to the extent of exempt income, citing relevant court decisions. The judgment referred to decisions by various High Courts emphasizing that disallowance cannot exceed the exempt income earned by the assessee. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court held that the disallowance under section 14A need not surpass the assessee's exempt income. Consequently, the AO was directed to limit the disallowance to Rs. 12,500, which was the amount of exempt income. Therefore, the appeal on this issue was partly allowed, and the overall appeal of the assessee was partly allowed.In conclusion, the judgment addressed the two main issues of transfer pricing adjustment and disallowance under section 14A, providing detailed analysis and referencing relevant legal principles and court decisions to arrive at a reasoned decision in favor of the assessee on both issues.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
