Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Adv. With Mr. Puneet Rai, Adv v. Panasonic Industrial Asia Pte. Ltd Through: Mr.parth, Adv
High Court
24 Apr 2017 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Adv. With Mr. Puneet Rai, Adv v. Panasonic Industrial Asia Pte. Ltd Through: Mr.parth, Adv
Date of order
24 Apr 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Adv. With Mr. Puneet Rai, Adv v. Panasonic Industrial Asia Pte. Ltd Through: Mr.parth, Adv, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
$~5.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 244/2017
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2 Through:
..... Appellant
Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Adv. with Mr. Puneet Rai, Adv.
Versus
PANASONIC INDUSTRIAL ASIA PTE. LTD Through: Mr.Parth, Adv.
..... Respondent
CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
%
O R D E R24.04.2017
1. This appeal, under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („Act‟), by the Revenue is against the order dated 16[th] September, 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal („ITAT‟) in ITA No. 6734/Del/2015 for the Assessment Year („AY‟) 2008-09.
2. The question of law involves the exclusion of one of the comparables i.e., ICC International Agencies Ltd. for the purpose of determining the arm's length price of the international transaction for the purpose of transfer pricing analysis. ITA 244/2017 Page 1 of 2
3. In the considered view of the Court, the reasoned order of the ITAT does not give rise to any substantial question of law. The appeal is dismissed.
S.MURALIDHAR, J
APRIL 24, 2017 ‘anb’
CHANDER SHEKHAR, J
ITA 244/2017
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.