NISHITH.TV
  • Mumbai
  • Silicon Valley
  • Bengaluru
  • Singapore
  • Mumbai BKC
  • New Delhi
  • Munich
  • New York

Locations

  • Mumbai
  • Silicon Valley
  • Bengaluru
  • Singapore
  • Mumbai BKC
  • New Delhi
  • Munich
  • New York
  • Content
  • Home
  • ABOUT US
  • NDA in the Media
  • Areas of Service
  • Research and Articles
  • Opportunities
  • Contact
  • NDACloud
  • Client Access
  • Member Access
  • Events and Calender
  • How we perform
  • Knowledge anywhere, anytime
  • See our recent deals
  • Up to date legal developments
  • Case studies in M&A

Research and Articles

HTMLPDF

  • Research at NDA
  • Research Papers
  • Research Articles
  • Policy Papers
  • NDA Think Tanks
  • NDA Hotline
  • New Ali Gunjan
  • Japan Desk ジャパンデスク

NDA-Hotline


  • Capital Markets Hotline
  • Companies Act Series
  • Climate Change Related Legal Issues
  • Competition Law Hotline
  • Corpsec Hotline
  • Court Corner
  • Cross Examination
  • Deal Destination
  • Debt Funding in India Series
  • Dispute Resolution Hotline
  • Education Sector Hotline
  • FEMA Hotline
  • Financial Service Update
  • Food & Beverages Hotline
  • Funds Hotline
  • Gaming Law Wrap
  • GIFT City Express
  • Green Hotline
  • HR Law Hotline
  • iCe Hotline
  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Hotline
  • International Trade Hotlines
  • Investment Funds: Monthly Digest
  • IP Hotline
  • IP Lab
  • Legal Update
  • Lit Corner
  • M&A Disputes Series
  • M&A Hotline
  • M&A Interactive
  • Media Hotline
  • New Publication
  • Other Hotline
  • Pharma & Healthcare Update
  • Private Client Wrap
  • Private Debt Hotline
  • Private Equity Corner
  • Real Estate Update
  • Realty Check
  • Regulatory Digest
  • Regulatory Hotline
  • Renewable Corner
  • SEZ Hotline
  • Social Sector Hotline
  • Tax Hotline
  • Technology & Tax Series
  • Technology Law Analysis
  • Telecom Hotline
  • The Startups Series
  • White Collar and Investigations Practice
  • Yes, Governance Matters.
  • Japan Desk ジャパンデスク

Tax Hotline

July 18, 2001

First blood on transfer-pricing case in India

Income-tax (I-T) authorities in Mumbai, India in their first-ever transfer-pricing-related case, have initiated penalty proceedings against Roussel India, on charges of allegedly overinvoicing the intermediates it had imported from a related company in France. Roussel's control over the Indian Company is through its 100 per cent subsidiary Roussel Laboratories, in the UK, which has a 33.33 per cent stake in Roussel India.

There are common directors in Roussel Uclaf, Roussel Laboratories UK and Roussel India, so as to be governed by the related party transaction norms. Before the introduction of the transfer pricing regulations in India, which was done in the Budget for the year 2001, the provisions of Section 92 of the Indian Income-Tax Act, 1961, dealt with transactions entered between residents and non-residents, for making additions in its assessment.

Interestingly, the Revenue department in this case did the transfer-pricing assessment much before the government enacted the new transfer-pricing laws.

The department has contended that the over-invoicing was done for the purpose of recording a loss and, thereby, evading taxes in India. The transactions relate to assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98.
Roussel India had merged with pharmaceutical major Hoechst Marion Roussel in 1998. The transactions in this case were the import of cefotaxim sodium and roxithromycin, materials used for making Claforan and Rulide - both antibiotics, from Roussel Uclaf, France. According to the I-T authorities, the pricing strategy adopted by Roussel Uclaf and Roussel India was intended to project revenues, which were less than the actuals.

I-T authorities contended that Uclaf overinvoiced exports to India to such an extent that Indian operation to manufacture Claforan appeared to be running in a loss. Roussel Uclaf and Roussel India are related companies and, hence, Roussel Uclaf controlled the transaction.

The alleged overinvoicing of cefotaxim compared to other importer manufacturers were 88 per cent and 164 per cent for 1996-97 and 1997-98, respectively, according to the estimation of I-T authorities. Similarly, in percentile terms, import of roxithromycin was overinvoiced 109 per cent and 103 per cent respectively, for assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98.

The case is now pending before the Commissioner (Appeal), Income Tax, which is the first Appellate Level for litigation before the revenue authorities.

 
 

Source: The Economic times June 12, 2001

Mission and Vision


Distinctly Different

What's New


Make in India
New Publication: September 20,2023
Make in India
Research Papers : September 15,2023

Events


Webinars

Impact of The New Indian Data Law on Multinational Companies Operating in India
August 22,2023 - August 22,2023

This event is over. For event material please click here


Seminar

GST solutions for Online Gaming Industry
September 13,2023 - September 13,2023

This event is over. For event material please click here


Round Table

Investing In Net Zero
July 22,2022 - July 22,2022

This event is over. For event material please click here

News Roundup


News Articles

Reciprocity requirement for enforcement: A roadblock in ease of doing business?
August 24,2023

Quotes

PE, VC funds form shadow panels amid rules delay
September 08,2023

Newsletters


New Publication

Make in India
September 20,2023

Tax Hotline

Subscription Fees paid to foreign Ed-Tech Platform is not taxable in India
September 15,2023

GIFT City Express

Family Offices in GIFT City – What are they and how do they actually work?
September 12,2023

  • Disclaimer
  • Content
  • Feedback
  • Walkthrough
  • Subscribe
Nishith Desai Associates@2016 All rights reserved.