9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 565X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been considered objectively – thus the order of the AA is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Assessing Authority for fresh adjudication – Decided in favour of Assessee. - I.T.A. No. 819 /Del/2014 - - - Dated:- 30-5-2014 - Shri R. P. Tolani And Shri B. R. Jain,JJ. For the Appellant : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sh. Neeraj Kr. Jain, ADV Sh. Puneet Singh, CA For the Respondent : Sh. Peeyush Jain Sh. Yogesh K. Verma, CIT, DR ORDER Per B. R. Jain, AM This appeal by assessee is against the order dated 30/12/2013 u/s 143(3) read with Section 144C of the Act by DCIT, Circle 15(1), New Delhi. 2. Briefly the facts are that the assessee is in the business of footwear, apparel, fitness equipment and sportswea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es for the AE, thus amounting to an international transaction; b) Expenditure on Selling and distribution, being in the nature of selling expenses had to be excluded from the ambit of AMP expenses. c) The resultant expenditure on AMP had to be benchmarked in terms of the directions contained in para 17.6 of the order of the Special Bench and para 31 of the order passed by the Tribunal in the case of the appellant. It was thus contended that incurring of AMP expenses by the appellant does not result into creation of marketing intangible on behalf of the Associated Enterprise and does not constitute an international transaction of rendering of services of promotion of brand building for the Associate Enterprise. The selling and dist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rule 10B(2) of the Rules is to be established qua such international transaction, ie. The specific characteristic and the nature of the expenditure on advertisement, is required to be taken into consideration for identification of comparable companies for benchmarking of such AMP expenditure, taking into consideration, inter-alia, the following criteria: 6. It has also been contended that AMP/Sales ratio of 10.83% (8.75% after excluding selling distribution expenses) of the appellant is less than the mean AMP/Sales ratio of the above comparable companies at Rs. 2.30% and, therefore, adjustment on account of AMP expenses is liable to be deleted. 7. It has further been contended that the fresh search of comparable companies tabulated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
