NDPS | Mentioning FIR Number On Memos Before Registration Makes the Entire Recovery Suspect: Himachal Pradesh High Court MACT | Once Deceased Is Proven To Be Skilled Worker, Deputy Commissioner's Wage Notification Is Applicable: P&H HC Bank’s Technical Excuses Can’t Override Employee’s Right to Ex Gratia Under Old Circulars: Bombay High Court Slams Canara Bank’s Rejection of Claim Once Worker Files Affidavit of Unemployment, Burden Shifts to Employer to Prove Gainful Employment: Delhi High Court Grants 17B Relief Despite 12-Year Delay Specific Relief Act | Readiness and Willingness Must Be Real and Continuous — Plaintiffs Cannot Withhold Funds and Blame the Seller: Bombay High Court Even If Claim Is Styled Under Section 163A, It Can Be Treated Under Section 166 If Negligence Is Pleaded And Higher Compensation Is Claimed: Supreme Court When Cheating Flows from One Criminal Conspiracy, the Law Does Not Demand 1852 FIRs: Supreme Court Upholds Single FIR in Multi-Crore Cheating Case Initiating Multiple FIRs on Same Facts is Impermissible: Supreme Court Quashes Parallel FIRs and Grants Bail Protection in Refund Case Limitation Act | Quasi-Judicial Bodies Cannot Invoke Section 5 Principles Without Express Statutory Grant: Supreme Court Arbitration Act | Commencement of Proceedings Triggered by Notice Receipt, Not Section 11 Filing: Supreme Court Strong and Cogent Evidence Must Exist at the Threshold to Deny Bail Under Section 319 CrPC: Supreme Court Appellate Court Under Section 37 Cannot Sit in Appeal Over Arbitral Award on Merits: Supreme Court Affidavit Ratifying Power of Attorney Cannot Be Disowned Later: Supreme Court Orders Specific Performance Despite Earlier Revocation Claims No Law Empowers a Corporation to Haunt a Retiree: Supreme Court Quashes Post-Retirement Disciplinary Action for Want of Jurisdiction Mere Expectation of Higher Bids Can't Justify Cancelling a Valid Auction: Supreme Court Quashes GDA’s Arbitrary Rejection of Highest Bidder Prolonged Incarceration Without Trial Violates Article 21, Even in Grave Economic Offences: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Arvind Dham in ₹673 Crore PMLA Case Article 14 | ‘Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midstream’: Supreme Court Quashes Punjab’s Modified Sports Quota Policy for MBBS Admissions Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midway: Supreme Court Quashes Bihar’s Retrospective Recruitment Amendment "Imaginary Ghost" - Court Permits Karthigai Deepam at Thiruparankundram ‘Deepathoon’: Madras High Court 353 IPC | Continuing Prosecution Against Citizens Despite Statutory Findings of Police Atrocities Is Abuse of Process: Kerala High Court Court Cannot Compel Plaintiff to Continue Suit Where No Liberty to File Fresh Suit is Sought: Bombay High Court Claim for Demurrage is Not a Crystallized Debt—Only an Unadjudicated Right to Sue: Andhra Pradesh High Court Declared Foreign Nationals Have No Right to Reside in India: Gauhati High Court Upholds Expulsion of Bangladeshi Woman Without Requiring Deportation Protocols

No Notional Interest Adjustment for Debt-Free Companies: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


High Court of Delhi, in a recent judgment, dismissed an appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-04, Delhi, against M/S Inductis India Pvt. Ltd. The bench, comprising Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Girish Kathpalia, delivered the verdict on December 4, 2023, marking a conclusion to the case registered under ITA 175/2019.

The case focused on the disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the determination of Arm’s Length Price in international transactions. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) had earlier made a decision regarding these matters, which was challenged by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax.

The High Court upheld the ITAT’s deletion of disallowance under Section 14A of the Act, noting that the respondent was a debt-free company and hence, did not utilize borrowed funds for investments in mutual funds.

The Court agreed with the ITAT’s assessment that no adjustment was required for notional interest on receivables from associated establishments, as the respondent company was debt-free.

The exclusion of Accentia Technologies Ltd. And TCS E-Serve Ltd. From the list of comparables for transfer pricing by the ITAT was upheld by the High Court.

The respondent, M/S Inductis India Pvt. Ltd., had filed its return of income in the year 2012, which was selected for scrutiny assessment, leading to the issuance of notices under various sections of the Income Tax Act. The subsequent assessment and orders by the ITAT led to the filing of this appeal by the Income Tax Department.

The High Court’s decision to dismiss the appeal indicates a validation of the ITAT’s earlier ruling. The judgment provides clarity on the application of Section 14A of the Income Tax Act in cases where the company is debt-free and on the assessment of international transactions under the Act.

Date of Decision: 04.12.2023

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME VS M/S INDUCTIS INDIA PVT. LTD.       

Latest Legal News