Nikon India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon Vs DCIT, Circle- 3(1), Gurgaon

Last updated: 16 December 2020

Court :
ITAT New Delhi

Brief :
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 10/07/2017 passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144C(3) read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2011-12.

Citation :
ITA No. 5146/DEL/2017 ( A.Y 2011-12)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH: ‘I-2’ NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND
MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 5146/DEL/2017 ( A.Y 2011-12)

Nikon India Pvt. Ltd.
Plot No. 71,
SEctdor-32, Institutional Area,
Gurgaon, Haryana
PIN 122001
AACCN5100F
(APPELLANT)

DCIT
Circle-3(1)
2nd Floor, HSIIDC Building,
Vaniyjaya Nikunj, Udyog
Vihar, Gurgaon, Haryana
(RESPONDENT)

Appellant by Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv & Sh.
Ankit Sahni, Adv
Respondent by Sh. Mritunjoy Baranwal, Sr.
DR

Date of Hearing 06.11.2020
Date of Pronouncement 14.12.2020

ORDER

PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 10/07/2017 passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144C(3) read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2011-12.

2. The grounds of appeal are as under:-

1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO has erred in assessing the total income of the Appellant under section 143(3) read with section 144C and 254 of the Act, for the relevant assessment year at INR 16,66,11,280 as against the returned income of INR 12,35,25,748.

2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO / Transfer Pricing Officer (“TPO”) have erred in making an adjustment of INR 4,30,85,529 to the arm’s length price (“ALP”) of (alleged) international transaction of Advertisement, Marketing and Promotion (“AMP”) expenditure holding the same to be not at ALP, applying the intensity approach.

To know more in details find the attachment file

Summarize this with AI

ChatGPT Perplexity Claude Google AI Grok