Articles by staff

CBDT Transfer Pricing Instruction

CBDT Transfer Pricing Instruction No.3/2003 dated 20.05.2003 | Latest Supreme Court Judgement

The Supreme Court has held in THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, MUMBAI M/s. S.G. ASIA HOLDINGS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. that in view of the transfer pricing guidelines issued by the CBDT in Instruction No.3/2003 the Tribunal was right in observing that by not making reference to the TPO, the Assessing Officer had breached the mandatory instructions issued by the CBDT

Draft Assessment Order S. 144C

Draft assessment order is void if mandate of section 144C is not followed

The question considered is whether the AO erred in issuing a notice of demand under section 156 and a notice under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act along with the said draft assessment order, thereby not following the mandate as laid down under section 144C of the Act. Is the draft assessment order liable to be held as void-ab-initio, bad in law and illegal and consequently the entire assessment ought to be quashed

No Image

ITAT Judgement On Transfer Pricing Of Cross Border AMP Expenditure

The transfer pricing adjustment is not expected to be made by deducing from the difference between the ‘excessive’ AMP expenditure incurred by the Assessee and the AMP expenditure of a comparable entity that an international transaction exists and then proceeding to make the adjustment of the difference in order to determine the value of such AMP expenditure incurred for the AE

No Image

ALP adjustment Of AMP Expenditure On Bright Line Test Is Not Permissible

The TPO, while framing the order u/s 92CA(3) of the Act, was well aware with the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Sony Ericcson Mobile Communication India Pvt Ltd reported at 276 CTR 97, and therefore, it cannot be said that the TPO was not aware that the Bright Line test has been discarded by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi