Disposed

Denso India Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax

Delhi HC29 Feb 2016ITA/451/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against income tax order. Appellant sought clarification to modify earlier directions favoring CUP method due to lack of comparable data. Court held granting clarification would essentially re-write the order, thus refused. Held TPO should apply CUP first or use most appropriate method if difficulties arise.

What did the court decide?

Clarification sought by appellant was not granted. Court directed TPO to apply CUP first, then most appropriate method if difficulties arise.

Denso India Limited Vs Commissioner of Income Tax — GST and Indirect Tax | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~S-3&4

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CM APPL.24435/2016 IN ITA 443/2013

¶4

DENSO INDIA LIMITED ..... Appellant versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent

¶5

CM APPL.24436/2016 IN ITA 451/2013

¶6

DENSO INDIA LIMITED ..... Appellant versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent

¶7

Appearance: Mr. Himanshu Sinha with Ms. Vrinda Tulshan, Advocates for applicant in CM APPL.24435 & 24436/2016, in both matters.

¶8

Mr. P. Roy Choudhury, Sr. Standing Counsel for the Revenue in both matters.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA

¶11

O R D E R % 05.08.2016

¶12

CM APPL.24435/2016 IN ITA 443/2013 & CM APPL.24436/2016 IN ITA 451/2013

¶13

We have heard the counsel for the parties.

¶14

The applicant urges that this Court’s directions that the CUP method is appropriate under the circumstances should be modified. It is pointed out that the relative data for comparables for the concerned years is no longer available; counsel also highlights that the imported

¶15

components which were of very special nature were localized. Consequently, the assessee would not be in a position to present any comparables’ data to the TPO to carry out the exercise of determining the pricing.

¶16

This Court is of the opinion that the main question put in issue by the applicant in its appeal under Section 260A was whether the TNMM was the most appropriate method as compared with CUP - the latter having been favoured by the ITAT. On this question, this Court ruled adversely against the appellant. In the circumstances, granting clarification would virtually be re-writing the order. Therefore, the clarification sought for cannot be granted. The net result, however, would be that TPO would firstly apply the CUP and in the event of any difficulty, apply whatever is the most appropriate method having regard to the nature of the transaction.

¶17

Both the applications stand disposed of in the above terms.

¶18

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

¶19

R.K. GAUBA, J

¶20

AUGUST 05, 2016 / vikas /

Denso India Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Denso India Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tongle Vinod Jagannath Vs Union of India and Anr.

Santosh Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Tomas T.O. Vs Inspector General C.I.S.F. & O

Denso India Limited Vs Commissioner of Income Tax

Man Mohan Kaur Vs Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and Ors.

Inderjit Banga Vs Registrar, Coop. Societies, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.