Income Tax
ITAT Jaipur rules berry ratio inapplicable for transfer pricing in jewellery manufacturing
Originally reported by Taxguru as: Income Tax | Berry Ratio Inapplicable to Jewellery Manufacturer in Transfer Pricing case: ITAT Jaipur
5 Nov 2026, 12:43 pm IST · Xecute.finance News Desk
The crisp read
The Jaipur bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ruled that the berry ratio does not apply to a jewellery manufacturing entity in a transfer pricing case. This decision provides clarity on appropriate profit-level indicators for precious metal and ornament producers during international transactions. Tax professionals must evaluate functional profiles carefully before applying specific financial ratios.
Xecute Impact Breakdown
For CAs
- Evaluate transfer pricing documentation for manufacturing clients to ensure distributor-focused metrics like the berry ratio are not inappropriately applied
- Advise jewellery manufacturing clients that standard intermediary metrics do not fit actual manufacturing activities under established transfer pricing principles
For businesses
- Jewellery manufacturing enterprises can challenge the uniform application of intermediary benchmarks by tax authorities in transfer pricing cases
- Businesses engaged in genuine manufacturing must use a distinct profit-level indicator rather than a distributor-focused metric
Deep dive - the full story
The Jaipur bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) delivered a ruling regarding transfer pricing, determining that the berry ratio is inapplicable to a jewellery manufacturing enterprise. The tribunal evaluated the operational profile of the taxpayer, which is engaged in the creation and production of jewellery items, and concluded that standard intermediary metrics do not fit actual manufacturing activities. No specific section numbers, dates, or numerical threshold amounts are stated in the source text. The berry ratio, defined as the ratio of gross profit to operating expenses, is typically deployed to evaluate the profitability of trading or distribution entities that do not perform significant manufacturing operations or add substantial value through production.
Under established transfer pricing principles, taxpayers engaged in genuine manufacturing undertake considerable operational risks, deploy capital assets, and transform raw materials, thereby requiring a distinct profit-level indicator rather than a distributor-focused metric. The old administrative practice of uniformly applying intermediary benchmarks to all business models has faced judicial pushback, as authorities now must align benchmarks with the actual functional profile, assets, and risks of the tested party. Tax professionals and chartered accountants representing manufacturing clients should review benchmarking studies to ensure that inappropriate profit-level indicators are excluded from transfer pricing documentation.
Practitioners must verify whether current audits rely on distributor-focused ratios for producers and prepare strong functional and economic analyses to challenge misapplied metrics. Watch for subsequent jurisdictional rulings regarding manufacturing benchmarks, and ensure compliance documentation accurately reflects the distinct nature of production activities to protect clients from arbitrary transfer pricing adjustments.
Source: taxguru.in
This is news/educational content, not investment advice. Xecute.finance is not SEBI-registered. Consult a qualified professional before acting.
Reading the static edition.
The live app adds Ask Xecute, deadline trackers, the daily quiz and one-tap deep dives.
Open this story in the Xecute app →Xecute.finance · India's one-stop finance platform · Founded & built by Kanishk Singh Sikarwar