Latest Income-Tax Details

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

In favour of assessee.DRP was not justified in rejecting the RPM method followed by assessee.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Sec. 92C of Income Tax Act, 1961 & Rule 10B(1)(b) of Income Tax Rules, 1962— Transfer pricing—Where a fundamental aspect permeating through the different assessment years is accepted one way or the other, a different value in the matter is not warranted unless there are any material change of facts,thus, RPM method followed by assessee was correct

Facts: Being aggrieved of the order of CIT(A), assessee went on appeal before Tribunal and sole issue that needs adjudication is with respect to the addition of Rs. 1,80,55,010 on account of ALP adjustment of international transaction of import of finished goods.

Held, that various benches of the Tribunal have held that when the assessee purchases the products from its AE’s and resales the same without any further value addition or further processing than RPM is the most appropriate method for determination of ALP of international transactions . It is assessee’s contentions that the purchase of trading goods undertaken by the assessee and application of Reselling Price Methods for determining the ALP has been accepted by the Revenue in preceding and succeeding assessment years. The aforesaid contention of the learned Authorised Representative is found correct in view of the assessment orders of the assessee for asst. yrs. 2012-13, 2013-14 and asst. yr. 2015-16 and no distinguishing feature in the facts for the year under consideration and that of earlier and subsequent years, wherein the RPM method which been followed by the assessee, has been brought by the Revenue, thus, order of AO was set aside. - TOPCON SOKKIA INDIA PVT. LTD. V/s DEPUTY CIT - [2020] 183 ITD 876 (ITAT-DELHI)