Case Law Details
Case Name : Diageo India Private Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2006- 07
Courts :
All ITAT ITAT Mumbai
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored
Diageo India Private Limited Vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)- ITAT held that the contractor of bottling unit of the taxpayer and the overseas Diageo group entities are Associated Enterprises (AEs) and transaction entered between them are covered by the provisions of the Indian transfer pricing regulations. The Tribunal held that reference made by the AO to the TPO under Section 92 CA(3) of the Act, is transaction specific and not enterprise specific. The TPO has no powers to scrutinise transactions which
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Sponsored
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment
Subscribe to Our Daily Newsletter
Note: By subscribing, you allow us to send you the latest tax news, product updates, promotional content, and exclusive offers directly to your inbox
Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
ACCORDING TO THE SCHEME OF THE RELATED PROVISIONS, ONE ENTITY IS CONSIDERED AN ‘ASSICIATE ENTERPRISE’ OF ANOTHER, PROVIDED THERE IS SOME RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TWO, WHICH IS OF THE NATURE AS ENVISAGED. THAT IS SEEN TO BE SO EVEN UNDER THE DEEMING PROVISION, TO PUT IT DIFFERENTLY, THE SCHEME COMES INTO PLAY ONLY IF THE 2 PARTIES ARE ‘RELATED’ WITHIN THE MEANIONG OF THE ASCHEME; NOT IF ‘UNRELATED’,
EVEN IN THE REPORTED CASE, THE FACTUAL POSITIION SEEMS TO BE SO. PROCEEDING ON THAT PREMISE, ONE FAILS TO SEE
THE CORRECTNESS OF THE IMPORT OF THE TERM ‘UNRELATED’ APPEARING IN THE TITLE OF THE WRITE-UP.