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

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2025 (4) TMI 47 - 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

        Income Tax Tribunal's Arm's Length Price Determination Set Aside for Not Following Supreme Court Guidelines Under Chapter X The HC set aside the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's determination of arm's length price (ALP) and remanded the case for fresh consideration. The Tribunal ...
                        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.

                            Income Tax Tribunal's Arm's Length Price Determination Set Aside for Not Following Supreme Court Guidelines Under Chapter X

                            The HC set aside the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's determination of arm's length price (ALP) and remanded the case for fresh consideration. The Tribunal failed to follow Supreme Court guidance from Sap Labs India (P) Ltd., which established that ALP determinations must strictly adhere to guidelines in Chapter X of the Income-tax Act and corresponding Rules. The HC rejected arguments that the Tribunal's decision was beyond judicial scrutiny, affirming that courts can review such determinations to ensure compliance with statutory framework. All substantive contentions were left open for the Tribunal's reconsideration in accordance with proper legal guidelines.




                            ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

                            The core legal issue considered in this judgment is whether the Tribunal correctly determined the arm's length price (ALP) in accordance with the guidelines stipulated under Chapter X of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the corresponding Rules. Specifically, the question is whether the Tribunal's determination of the ALP can be scrutinized by the High Court under Section 260A of the IT Act for compliance with the relevant legal framework and guidelines.

                            ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

                            Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents

                            The determination of the arm's length price is governed by Chapter X of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which includes Sections 92, 92A to 92CA, 92D, 92E, and 92F, along with Rules 10A to 10E. The Supreme Court's decision in Sap Labs India (P) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer is pivotal, as it clarifies that the High Court can scrutinize the Tribunal's determination of the ALP to ensure compliance with these provisions.

                            Court's Interpretation and Reasoning

                            The Court referred to the Supreme Court's observations in Sap Labs India (P) Ltd., which emphasized that the Tribunal must adhere to the guidelines under Chapter X when determining the ALP. The Supreme Court rejected the notion that the Tribunal's determination is final and beyond scrutiny by the High Court. Instead, it allowed for High Court review to ensure that the Tribunal's findings are not perverse and that the guidelines are properly followed.

                            Key Evidence and Findings

                            The Court noted that the Tribunal did not consider the Supreme Court's decision in Sap Labs India (P) Ltd. when making its determination. As a result, the Tribunal's order was deemed insufficiently grounded in the necessary legal framework, warranting a remand for reconsideration.

                            Application of Law to Facts

                            In applying the law, the Court determined that the Tribunal's decision lacked a thorough examination as required by the Supreme Court's guidance. The High Court concluded that the Tribunal should reassess the ALP determination in light of the Supreme Court's directives, ensuring adherence to the guidelines under Chapter X.

                            Treatment of Competing Arguments

                            Mr. Thakkar, representing the respondent, argued that despite the lack of explicit reference to the guidelines, the determination was consistent with them. Mr. Sharma, representing the appellant, disputed this claim. The Court chose not to resolve these contentions at this stage, instead remanding the matter to the Tribunal for a fresh evaluation.

                            Conclusions

                            The Court concluded that the Tribunal's failure to consider the Supreme Court's decision necessitated a remand for a fresh determination of the ALP. The Court left all substantive contentions open for the Tribunal's reconsideration.

                            SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

                            Preserve Verbatim Quotes of Crucial Legal Reasoning

                            The Court emphasized the Supreme Court's ruling: "Therefore, while determining the arm's length price, the Tribunal has to follow the guidelines stipulated under Chapter X of the IT Act... Any determination of the arm's length price under Chapter X dehors the relevant provisions of the guidelines referred to hereinabove, can be considered as perverse..."

                            Core Principles Established

                            The judgment reinforced the principle that the High Court has the authority to scrutinize the Tribunal's determination of the ALP to ensure compliance with statutory guidelines, rejecting the notion that such determinations are beyond appellate review.

                            Final Determinations on Each Issue

                            The substantial question of law was answered by setting aside the Tribunal's order and remanding the case for fresh consideration, with instructions to adhere to the Supreme Court's observations in Sap Labs India (P) Ltd.


                            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