How many judgments cite CIT v. Agnity India Technologies (P.) Ltd.?

171 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Agnity India Technologies (P.) Ltd. (36 Taxmann.com 289), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Agnity India Technologies (P.) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 10B(3), Section 10(B)(2), Section 10B(2)(a), Section 12(4), Section 133(6), Section 143(3).

CIT v. Agnity India Technologies (P.) Ltd.

36 Taxmann.com 289High Court2013#568 most cited

What is CIT v. Agnity India Technologies (P.) Ltd. authority for?

The Delhi High Court holds that Infosys Ltd. is not comparable to a captive software development service provider for transfer pricing analysis, given its huge turnover, high profit margins, ownership of intangible intellectual property rights, branded products, and differing risk profile.

171

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Agnity India Technologies (P.) Ltd. · Agnity India Technologies · transfer pricing · comparable companies · Infosys comparability · captive service provider · software development · intangible intellectual property rights · turnover filter · risk profile · functional comparability · associated enterprises

Also reported as

219 Taxmann 2693 DTR 375

Sections most often in play

Section 10B(3)Section 10(B)(2)Section 10B(2)(a)Section 12(4)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144B Section 144C(13)

Issues it is cited on

captive service provider working capital adjustment far analysis related party transaction comparable companies tested party transactional net margin method most appropriate method intangible assets associated enterprises section 10a tnmm

Judgments citing CIT v. Agnity India Technologies (P.) Ltd.

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Curam Software International Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal and the cross objection filed by

ITA 499/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav

For Appellant: Shri. Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR

Section 10A

…erused the orders and heard the rival contentions. It is not disputed that Infosys brand has a significant intangible value and it had revenue from software product segment also. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Agnity India Technologies P. Ltd [93 DTR 375], while affirming a decision of this Tribunal where it was held that Infosys Ltd could not be considered as a comparable, had upheld the view that it was a giant company in the area of development of software, assuming all risks leading to higher IT(TP)A.499 & CO.136/Bang/2015 Page - 17 profits. Further in the case of Pegasystems Worldwide Indi…

M/S Logitech Engineering & Design India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 287/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav

For Appellant: Shri. Vishal Kalsa, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Preeti Garg, CIT-DR

…It(tp)a.287 & 127/Bang/2015 Page - 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENGALURU BENCH 'A', BENGALURU BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T(TP).A No.287/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) M/s. Logitech Engineering & Design India P. Ltd, (erstwhile M/s. Lifesize Communication P. Ltd), Plot No.TS140, Block 2 & 9, Elnet Software City, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Taramani, Chennai 600 013 .. Appellant PAN : AABCL2081A v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle – 4(1)(1), Bengaluru .. Respondent I.T(TP).A No.127/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) Deputy…

M/S. St-Ericsson India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 1672/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: S/Shri S.D. Kapila, R.R. Maurya &For Respondent: Shri Neeraj Kumar, Senior DR

Section 143Section 144C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘I-1’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1672/Del./2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) St-Ericsson India Private Limited, vs. Addl.CIT, Range 9, D – 28, South Extension, Part – I, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. (PAN : AAMCS1022K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : S/Shri S.D. Kapila, R.R. Maurya & Sanjay Kumar, Advocates and Shri Pankaj Rohta, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Neeraj Kumar, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 07.02.2017 Date of Order : 22.02.2017 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : The Appe…

M/S. Mps Technologies Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for 20

ITA 2031/CHNY/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Feb 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 2031/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-2008. M/S. Mps Technologies Ltd, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (Since Merged With Mps Ltd) Of Income Tax, 27, G.N. Chetty Road, Company Circle Iv(3) T. Nagar, Chennai. Chennai 600 017. [Pan Aaecm 0205A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. Pathclavath Peereja, CIT

Section 144C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘ D’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज", लेखा सद"य के सम" । [BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 2031/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2007-2008. M/s. MPS Technologies Ltd, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (since merged with MPS Ltd) of Income Tax, 27, G.N. Chetty Road, Company Circle IV(3) T. Nagar, Chennai. Chennai 600 017. [PAN AAECM 0205A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by :…

Visual Graphics Computing Services India (P) Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT Co Cle III (4), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for 28

ITA 2340/CHNY/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2340/Mds/2012 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2008-2009

For Appellant: Shri. Nishant Thakkar, Adv &

Section 10ASection 144CSection 234BSection 234C

…IT vs. M/s. Pentair Water India Pvt. Ltd, (2016) 381 ITR 216 M/s. Infosys BPO Limited could not be considered as a good comparable. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Agnity India Technologies Pvt. Ltd (2013) 93 DTR 375. Contra, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that M/s. 21. Cosmic Global Limited was assessee’s own comparable and therefore assessee could not now seek exclusion. Viz-a-viz M/s. Infosys BPO Limited, submission of the ld. Authorised Representative was that volume of activity was not relevant when functional profiles were similar. Thus, he…

Comverse Network Systems India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed partly for statistical purpose

ITA 6334/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon M/S. Comverse Network Systems India Pvt. Ltd., Dlf Infinity Tower-A, 2Nd Floor, Dlf Cyber City Phase-Ii, Gurgaon Pan : Aabcc3425B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By S/Sh. G.C. Srivastava & Daksh Bhardwaj, Advocates Respondent By Sh. T.M. Shiva Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 02.11.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 20.01.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Dated 23/10/2012 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) , In Compliance To The Direction Of The Dispute Resolution Panel ( Drp) , Under Section 143 (3) Read With Section 144C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’), In Respect Of Assessment Year 2008-09 Raising Following Grounds: “On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Assessing Officer (“Ao") Has Erred In Passing The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) After Considering The Adjustments Proposed By The Learned Transfer Pricing Officer (“Tpo”) In His Order Passed Under Section 92Ca(3) Of The Act & Subsequently Confirmed By The Hon’Ble Dispute Resolution Panel (“Drp”).

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92CSection 92F

…s only a captive unit rendering services to its AE alone without acquiring any intellectual property rights in the work done by it in the development of software. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in 22 AY: 2008-09 CIT vs. Agnity India Technologies (P) Ltd. (2013) 219 Taxmann 26 (Del) considered the giantness of Infosys Ltd., in terms of risk profile, nature of services, number of employees, ownership of branded products and brand related profits, etc. in comparison with such factors prevailing in the case of Agnity India Technologies Pvt. Ltd., being, a captive unit providing software development services without hav…

DCIT vs. M/S Control Component (I) Pvt. Ltd

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1757/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri. P. K. Prasad &For Respondent: Shri. D. Sudhakar Rao, CIT-DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.4/Bang/2014 (Assessment year: 2009-10) M/s. Control Component India Pvt. Ltd., SJR Park, 6th Floor, Warp Tower, … Appellant Flat No-13, 14, 15, EPIP Zone Phase I, Whitefield Main Road, Bangalore-560066. PAN : AACCC 8610 K Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, … Respondent Circle-11(2), Bangalore. IT(TP)A No.1757/Bang/2013 (Assessment year: 2009-10) The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, … Appellant Circle-11(2), Bangalore. Vs. M/s. Control Co…

M/S. Agilent Technologies (International) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Gurgaon

In the result ground No. 3 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1255/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishiagilent Technologies Acit, (International) Pvt. Ltd, Circle-1, Vs. Plot No.-Cp-11, Sector-8, Gurgaon Imt Mangsar, Gurgaon Pan: Aadca4115C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Kanchan KaushalFor Respondent: Mr. Sunil Sharma, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 92

…Page 1 of 22 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-2”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Agilent Technologies ACIT, (International) Pvt. Ltd, Circle-1, Vs. Plot No.-CP-11, Sector-8, Gurgaon IMT Mangsar, Gurgaon PAN: AADCA4115C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Mr. Kanchan Kaushal, Ms. Shruti Khimta, AR Revenue by: Mr. Sunil Sharma, CIT DR Date of Hearing 05/07/2016 Date of pronouncement 29/09/2016 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is filed by assessee against the order of the ld Assessing Officer (in short „AO‟) dated…

Ucb India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 7691/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Lohia a/wFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234A

…ecision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT v/s Pentair Water India Pvt. Ltd., Tax Appeal no.18/2015 dated 16th September 2015. He also relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v/s Agnity India Technologies Pvt. Ltd., [2013] 36 Taxmann.com 289 (Del.) as well as number of other decisions of the Tribunal for excluding companies with reasonably high turnover. Without prejudice to the aforesaid argument, as alternative contentions, learned Authorised Representative also objected to selection of certain comparables on functional dissimilarity which are as under:– Infosys Technologie…

M/S Te Connectivity India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. CIT

ITA 1603/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jul 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri. Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri. Pravin Kishore Prasad, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri. K. R. Narayan, JCIT

…since it was having diversified folio of activities and huge in nature, owning a number of intangible and intellectual property. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Agnity India Technologies P. Ltd [(2013) 93 DTR 375]. 24. Per contra, Ld. DR opposing the exclusions sought by assessee submitted that M/s. Bodhtree Consulting Ltd, Geometric Software Solutions Co. Ltd, Satyam Computer Services Ltd, and Infosys Technologies Ltd, appeared in assessee’s own TP study. As per the Ld. DR, assessee could not now turn back and say that such companies were not good co…

Swiss Re Shared Services (India) Pvt. Limited, Bangalore vs. Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, we direct exclusion of Accentia Technologies Ltd,

ITA 380/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Abraham P. George & Shri. Vijay Pal Raoi.T(Tp).A No.380/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/S. Swiss Re Shared Services (India) P. Ltd, Vaswai Centroplolis, 2Nd To 6Th Floor, No.21, Langford Road, Langford Town, Bengaluru 560 027 .. Appellant Pan : Aaecs8786L V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle – 6(1)(2), Bangalore .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Chavali S. Narayan, Ca Revenue By : Shri. G. R. Reddy, Cit – Dr-I Heard On : 13.06.2016 Pronounced On : 08.07.2016 O R D E R Per Abraham P. George:

For Appellant: Shri. Chavali S. Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. G. R. Reddy, CIT – DR-I

Section 143(3)Section 92

…IT(TP)A.380/Bang/2016 Page - 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH 'A', BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T(TP).A No.380/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/s. Swiss Re Shared Services (India) P. Ltd, Vaswai Centroplolis, 2nd to 6th floor, No.21, Langford Road, Langford Town, Bengaluru 560 027 .. Appellant PAN : AAECS8786L v. Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle – 6(1)(2), Bangalore .. Respondent Assessee by : Shri. Chavali S. Narayan, CA Revenue by : Shri. G. R. Reddy, CIT – DR-I Heard on : 13.06.2016 Pronounced on :…

Lrn Technology and Content Solutions (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 9(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 329/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasad, आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No.329/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 Lrn Technology & The Dcit-Circle 9(2), बनाम/ Content Solutions (India) Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai-400 020 Nirlon Knowledge Park, Block B6, 3Rd Floor, Off Western Express Highway, Goregaon East, Mumbai-400 063 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Karishma R. Phatarphekar Shri Keerthika R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Sharma

For Appellant: Karishma RFor Respondent: Sharma

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ , मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, आयकर अपील सं /I.TA No.329/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 LRN Technology and The DCIT-Circle 9(2), बनाम/ Content Solutions (India) Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai-400 020 Nirlon Knowledge Park, Block B6, 3rd Floor, Off Western Express Highway, Goregaon East, Mumbai-400 063 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant by: Karishma R. Phatarphekar Shri K…

Avaya India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 146/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava:Asstt. Yr: 2008-09 Avaya India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit Circle 2(1), Dlf Square, 2Nd Floor, New Delhi. Jacaranda Marg, Dlf City, Phase-Ii, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaeca 3592 N ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Rohit Tiwari Ca Respondent By : Shri Amarendra Kumar Cit (Dr)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari CAFor Respondent: Shri Amarendra Kumar CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-1” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA: JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Yr: 2008-09 Avaya India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT Circle 2(1), DLF Square, 2nd Floor, New Delhi. Jacaranda Marg, DLF City, Phase-II, Gurgaon. PAN: AAeCA 3592 N ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Rohit Tiwari CA Respondent by : Shri Amarendra Kumar CIT (DR) Date of hearing : 19/05/2016. Date of order : 17/06/2016. O R D E R PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M: This is assessee’s appeal against the assessment order dated 22.10.2012, passed by the Assessi…

Avl India Software Private Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 279/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava:

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Singh ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Sr. DR

Section 133(6)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-2” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA: JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA nos. 6454/Del/2012 & 279/Del/2013 Asstt. Yrs: 2007-08 & 2008-09 AVL India Software Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT Circle 2(1), CSC. C-9, (Vasant Kunj), New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AAACA 0042 R ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S.P. Singh AR Shri Manoneet Dalal Adv. Shri Gaurav Bhutani CA Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Kumar Sr. DR Date of hearing : 17/05/2016. Date of order : 10/06/2016. O R D E R PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M: These are assessee’s appeals agai…

Avl India Software Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 6454/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava:

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Singh ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Sr. DR

Section 133(6)

M/S E4E Tech Support (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1053/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Chandrashekar, CIT (D.R)

Section 10ASection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234DSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH “ B ” BEFORE SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.(T.P) A. No.1053/Bang/2011 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/s. Pole to Win India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, (formerly e4e Tech Support (India) Pvt. Circle 11(3), Ltd.) Bangalore. No.17/9B, 17/4B, Maruthi Chambers, Rupena Agrahara, Hosur Road, Bangalore-68 PAN AABCV 1574A Appellant Respondent. Appellant By : Shri Padamchand Khincha, C.A. Respondent By : Shri P. Chandrashekar, CIT (D.R) Date of Hearing : 18.04.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 08.06.2016…

ITO, Bangalore vs. M/S Net Devices India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as C

ITA 1099/BANG/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 May 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Dr.P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT (D.R.)

Section 10ASection 80HSection 92C(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH “ A ” BEFORE SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.(T.P) A. No.1099/Bang/2011 (Assessment Year : 2005-06) Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/s. Net Devices India Pvt. Ltd., Ward 12(1), A Wing, Silver Oak, Manya Bangalore. Embassy Business Park, Nagarwara, ORR, Bangalore. PAN AACCN 2025R Appellant Respondent. C.O. No.19/Bang/201 (In I.T.(T.P) A. No.1099/Bang/2011) (Assessment Year : 2005-06) (By Assessee) Appellant By : Dr.P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT (D.R.) Respondent/C.O. By : Shri Pravin Kishore Prasad, Advocate. Date of Hear…

Nokia Siemens Networks India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal is hereby partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5837/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Advocate and Ms. Manasvini Bajpai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Mohan Govil, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 41Section 92CSection 92F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘I-2’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5837 /Del./2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) Nokia Siemens Networks India Pvt. Ltd., vs. ACIT, Circle 13 (1), 7th Floor, Building No.9A, New Delhi. DLF Cyber City, Sector 25A, Gurgaon – 122 002 (Haryana). (PAN : AABCS9839H) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Deepak Chopra, Advocate and Ms. Manasvini Bajpai, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Amit Mohan Govil, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 03.05.2016 Date of Order : 18.05.2016 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUD…

M/S. Sony Mobile Communications International Ab (India Branch Office), New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 769/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, Shri Sandeep SFor Respondent: Shri A.M. Govil, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…assessee is simply a captive unit rendering services to its AE alone without acquiring any intellectual property rights in the work done by it in the development of software. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Agnity India Technologies (P) Ltd. (2013) 219 Taxmann 26 (Del) considered the giantness of Infosys Ltd., in terms of risk profile, nature of services, number of employees, ownership of branded products and brand related profits, etc. in comparison with the factors prevailing in the case of Agnity India Technologies Pvt. Ltd., being, a captive unit providing software development services without h…

Headstrong Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 714/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, Adv. , ShFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT,DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 154

…t the assessee is a captive unit rendering services to its AE alone without acquiring any intellectual property rights in the work done by it in the development of software. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Agnity India Technologies (P) Ltd. (2013) 219 Taxmann 26 (Del) considered the giantness of Infosys Ltd., in terms of risk profile, nature of services, number of employees, ownership of branded products and brand related profits, etc. in comparison with such factors prevailing in the case of Agnity India Technologies Pvt. Ltd., being, a captive unit providing software development services without…