##PAGE1##

P ag e | 1 ITA No.3666/Del/2024 Toshiba India Pvt. Ltd. (AY: 2012-13)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, DELHI

BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER &

SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.3666/Del/2024 (Assessment Year:2012-13)

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Toshiba India Pvt. Ltd.

Income-tax, E-20, 1^st and 2^nd Floor Room No. 192A, First HauzKhas,

Floor, CR Building, ITO, New Delhi – 110016 Delhi – 110002

(cid:1)थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AABCT4829N Appellant .. Respondent

Appellant by : Sh. Upvan Gupta, Adv. (virtual)

Respondent by : Sh. Dharm Veer Singh, CIT (DR)

Date of Hearing 17.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 25.03.2026

O R D E R

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated

11.01.2023 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-44, Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’)

P ag e | 2 ITA No.3666/Del/2024 Toshiba India Pvt. Ltd. (AY: 2012-13)

in DIN : ITBA/APL/S/250/2022-23/1048635090(1) arising out of the order dated 31.01.2020 u/s 143(3) r.w.s 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the ACIT, Circle 25(2) New

Delhi for AY: 2012-13.

2. On hearing both sides we find that the appeal of the department is filed with the delay of 520 days and an application for condonation of delay has been filed asserting that the delay has occurred due to combination of various factors including transfer of charge to multiple officers. Though the delay is of substantial period, however, considering the reasons cited we allow the

application and condone the delay.

3. Further on hearing of merits we find that ld. DR could not substantiate the ground as raised by citing any distinction of facts from previous or subsequent years where in this Tribunal and also Hon’ble Delhi High Court has considered the issue. Nor subsequent development of law is cited to showand to assert that ld. CIT(A) was not justified in relying upon the

decisions in the case of assessee itself.

4. The issue revolves around the transfer pricing adjustments made on alleged international transaction involving AMP expenses. Admittedly, in

P ag e | 3 ITA No.3666/Del/2024 Toshiba India Pvt. Ltd. (AY: 2012-13)

AY: 2011-12 which is preceding assessment year vide ITA No. 1611/Del/2016 order dated 11.06.2019 Coordinate Bench relying decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 374 ITR 118 disproved the application of BLT for making any adjustment in respect of AMP. Thereafter in subsequent Assessment Year 2013-14 another Coordinate Bench vide ITA No. 6531/Del/2017 order dated 30.11.2017 has followed the previous year decisions in case of assessee. Thus, relief given by the Ld. CIT(A) deserves no interference the ground of the revenue have no substance, the appeal is accordingly,

dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25.03.2026

Sd/- Sd/-

(Naveen Chandra) (Anubhav Sharma)

ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 25.03.2026

Rohit, Sr. PS

P ag e | 4 ITA No.3666/Del/2024 Toshiba India Pvt. Ltd. (AY: 2012-13) Copy forwarded to:

1. Appellant

2. Respondent

3. CIT

4. CIT(Appeals)

5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITAT NEW DELHI