The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ruled out certain comparables in a transfer pricing matter. This court dismissed the appeal, holding that the concurrent findings did not warrant interference as the issue involved appreciation of facts regarding functional similarities.
The appeal is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~12
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - DELHI - 2
..... Appellant Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus M/S BECTON DICKINSON INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA O R D E R % 16.02.2018
This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 questions the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s (ITAT) decision, ruling out certain comparables.
This Court at the outset notices that in ITA 48 of 2018 an identical question had arisen with respect to the exclusion of the same comparables. On 16.01.2018 while disposing of that appeal (Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2 vs. M/s. Becton Dickinson India Pvt. Ltd.) , the Court had observed as follows:-
“2. The assessee engages itself in the manufacturing and trading of medical devices and diagnostic equipments which included injection systems, insulin syringes, hypo syringes, hypo needles etc. It is a subsidiary of Becton Dickinson Mauritius Ltd. which in turn is a subsidiary of Becton Dickinson and Company, USA. The initial transfer pricing report filed by the assessee and relied upon before the TPO included Span Diagnostic Limited, Hicks Thermometers (India) Ltd. and Centenial Surgical Suture Ltd. as comparables.
These were directed to be excluded by the TPO on the ground of functional dissimilarities. The rationale was that the Span Diagnostic mainly manufactures diagnostic regents, elissa kits for AIDS; Hicks Thermometers also manufacturing elissa kits, thermometers and Centenial Surgical was manufacturing surgical suture. The CIT (A) was of the opinion that the exclusion of these three comparables was not justified as all the companies including the assessee were involved in manufacturing and sell of medical and diagnostic equipment. The ITAT agreed with the conclusion of the appellate Commissioner.
The same reasoning applies in the present case. Consequently, no question of law arises and the appeal is therefore dismissed.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J
A. K. CHAWLA, J
FEBRUARY 16, 2018/ nn
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the exclusion of specific comparables by the Finance and Transfer Pricing Department constituted a question of law requiring interference.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
ITA 48 of 2018 (Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2 vs. M/s. Becton Dickinson India Pvt. Ltd.)Followed¶7
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax - Delhi - 2
M/S Becton Dickinson India Pvt. Ltd.
S. Ravindra Bhat
A. K. Chawla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
