AXA Technologies Shared Services (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers2016 TaxPub(DT) 5013 (Bang-Trib) AXA Technologies Shared Services (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 --Transfer pricing--Determination of ALPManagement fees paid to AE under agreement----Where management fees was paid to AE under agreement and there was no finding by TPO that management services were availed of by assessee separately from a third party other than its AE, he was not justified in holding ALP of management fees at NIL on the ground that assessee failed to prove receipt of management services. --Where management fees was paid to AE under agreement and there was no finding by TPO that management services were availed of by assessee separately from a third party other than its AE, he was not justified in holding ALP of management fees at NIL on the ground that assessee failed to prove receipt of management services. Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 92C *REFERRED :* Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2016) 68 Taxmann.com 322 (Del), CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Del), AWB India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2015) 152 ITD 770 (Del-Trib.) and Dresser Rand India (P.) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (2012) 53 SOT 173 (Mum-Trib). FAVOUR : In assessee's favour A.Y. : 2007-08 IN THE ITAT, BANGALORE 'A' BENCH ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, A.M. & VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2016 TaxPub(DT) 5013 (Bang-Trib)

AXA Technologies Shared Services (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

--Transfer pricing--Determination of ALPManagement fees paid to AE under agreement----Where management fees was paid to AE under agreement and there was no finding by TPO that management services were availed of by assessee separately from a third party other than its AE, he was not justified in holding ALP of management fees at NIL on the ground that assessee failed to prove receipt of management services. --Where management fees was paid to AE under agreement and there was no finding by TPO that management services were availed of by assessee separately from a third party other than its AE, he was not justified in holding ALP of management fees at NIL on the ground that assessee failed to prove receipt of management services.

Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 92C

REFERRED : Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2016) 68 Taxmann.com 322 (Del), CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Del), AWB India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2015) 152 ITD 770 (Del-Trib.) and Dresser Rand India (P.) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (2012) 53 SOT 173 (Mum-Trib).

FAVOUR : In assessee's favour

A.Y. : 2007-08

IN THE ITAT, BANGALORE 'A' BENCH

ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, A.M. & VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M.