CIT v. Patni Computer Systems Ltd.

215 Taxmann 108High Court2013#1230 most cited

What is CIT v. Patni Computer Systems Ltd. authority for?

The provision of an extended credit period or non-charging of interest on delayed receivables from associated enterprises constitutes an international transaction under Section 92B(1) and requires separate benchmarking at arm's length, even retrospectively due to the Finance Act, 2012 amendment.

92

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Patni Computer Systems Ltd. · Section 92B(1) · Section 92B amendment · Finance Act 2012 · retrospective effect · interest on outstanding receivables · overdue receivables · international transaction · arm's length price · benchmarking · associated enterprises · transfer pricing

Also reported as

33 Taxmann.com 3

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 92BSection 234ASection 270ASection 143(1)Section 144BSection 144C(13)

Issues it is cited on

section 92b(1)interest on outstanding receivablessection 90(3)working capital adjustmentcaptive service providersection 92bmultiple year datarelated party transactionresale price methodtransactional net margin methodr&d expenditurecomparable companies

Judgments citing CIT v. Patni Computer Systems Ltd.

M/S Cypress Semiconductor Technology India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 3133/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 3133/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. Cypress Semiconductor Technology India Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy No. 65/2, Bagmane Laurel, Commissioner Of Block C, Bagmane Tech Park, Income Tax, C.V Raman Nagar, Circle – 2 (1)(1), Bangalore – 560 093. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aabcc2470Q Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar
Section 133(6)Section 92CSection 92D

…ceivables has been held to be an international transaction. Referring to discussion in said order, it was stated that Hon'ble Delhi Bench in this case noted a decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.), dealt with question of law: (c) `Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amount to international transactio…

American Power Conversion (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Addl.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated herein above

ITA 1111/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 1111/Bang/2012 Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, CA
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…ceivables has been held to be an international transaction. Referring to discussion in said order, it was stated that Hon'ble Delhi Bench in this case noted a decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.), dealt with question of law: (c) `Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amount to international Page 41 o…

Swiss Re Global Business Solutions India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 397/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 133(6)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.397/Bang/2021 Assessment year : 2016-17 Swiss Re Global Business Solutions Vs. The Addl./Jt./Dy./Asst. India Pvt. Ltd., Commissioner of Income Tax/ITO, 2nd to 5th Floor, Fairwinds Building, National Faceless Assessment Embassy Golf Links Business Park, Centre (NFAC), Challaghatta Village, Varthur Hobli, Delhi. Bengaluru – 560 071. PAN: AAECS 8786L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Nageswar Rao, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, CI…

M/S Trilar Video Technologies India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 3367/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Smt Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A. No. 3367/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Synamedia India Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly known as Trilar Video Technologies The Assistant India Pvt. Ltd.), Commissioner of Income Block 9A & 9B, Pritech Tax, Park, Survey No. 51-64/4, Circle 7(1)(1), Sarjapur Outer Ring Road, vs. Bangalore. Bellandur Village, Bangalore – 560 103. PAN: AACCN1140K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sharath Rao, CA Revenue by : Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT (DR)…

M/S. Borqs Software Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 310/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri. Tata Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.310/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/s BORQS Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, No.3, Prestige Alkareem, Circle -1(1)(2), BMTC Building, 80 Feet Road, 6th Block, Near KHB Games Village, Ground Floor, Edward Road, Bengaluru-560 052. Koramangala, Bengaluru-560095. PAN : AADCB 8697 G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri. Tata Krishna, Advocate Respondent by : Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru Date of…

Barracuda Networks India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 229/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri. Padam Chand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.229/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/s. Barracuda Networks India Private Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, 9 Hosur Road, Prestige Blue Chip Software Circle -1(1)(1), Park, Block 2, Level 3, 2nd Floor, Opp. Christ Bengaluru. University, Hosur Main Road, Bengaluru – 560 029. PAN : AABCN 1157 H APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri. Padam Chand Khincha, CA Respondent by : Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru Date of hearing…

M/S Erm India P Ltd., New Delhi vs. Neac, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed in part and for statistical purpose

ITA 513/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Sa No. 92/Del/2021 (In Ita No. 513/Del/2021) Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Mr. Ajit Jain, A.R. &For Respondent: Mr. Bhagwati Charan, Sr. DR
Section 144CSection 92B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I-1’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SA No. 92/Del/2021 (in ITA No. 513/Del/2021) Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s. ERM India Pvt. Ltd., vs. National e-assessment Building No. 10, 3rd Floor, Centre, New Delhi. Tower-B, DLF, Cyber City, Phase-II, Gurgaon. PAN : AAACE1502C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by :Mr. Ajit Jain, A.R. & Mr. Arpan Khanna, CA Respondent by:Mr. Bhagwati Charan, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 04.08.2021 Date of order : 28.09.2021 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M. This…

Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Asst. CIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1767/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2020AY 2015-16
Section 115Section 11JSection 143(3)Section 90Section 90(3)

…ITA Nos: 1767 and 2048/Mum/2019 Assessment year: 2015-16 Page 1 of 37 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI ‘B’ BENCH, MUMBAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar, Vice President and, Amarjit Singh, Judicial Member] ITA No.: 1767/Mum/2019 Assessment year: 2015-16 Bank of India …………………….. Appellant Taxation Department, 8th floor, Star House, C 5 G Block, BKC, Bandra East, Mumbai 400 051 [PAN: AAACB0472C] Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1)(1), Mumbai ………………….Respondent ITA No.: 2048/Mum/2019 Assessment year: 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1)(1), Mumbai …………………….. Appellant Vs. Bank of India…

Techbooks International Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. ACIT, Noida

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6102/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishitechbooks International Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, Plot No. 37, Block-A, Circle-3, Sector-60, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida Noida Pan: Aabct3774A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manoneet Dalal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mritunjoy Baranwal, Sr. DR
Section 234BSection 271Section 92Section 92B(1)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-2”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Techbooks International Pvt. Ltd, Vs. ACIT, Plot No. 37, Block-A, Circle-3, Sector-60, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida Noida PAN: AABCT3774A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Manoneet Dalal, Adv Shri Yishu Goel, AR Revenue by: Shri Mritunjoy Baranwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 12/03/2020 Date of pronouncement 06/07/2020 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld AO dated 26.10.2016 for the Assessm…

Lotus Labs Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 2207/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No.2207/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2013 – 14

For Appellant: Shri. Chavli Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT (DR)
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80

…ceivables has been held to be an international transaction. Referring to discussion in said order, it was stated that Hon’ble Delhi Bench in this case noted a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.), which dealt with question of law: (c) `Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amount to international tran…

M/S. Metricstream Infotech (India) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 2347/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Apr 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No.2347/Bang/2019 Assessment Year : 2015 – 16

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…ceivables has been held to be an international transaction. Referring to discussion in said order, it was stated that Hon’ble Delhi Bench in this case noted a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.), which dealt with question of law: “(c) `Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amount to international tr…

Addl.CIT., -Range-10(2), Mumbai vs. Wns Global Services Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, cross objection filed by the assesee is partly allowed

ITA 1451/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N.Prasad & Shri G. Manjunathaaddl.Cit, Range-10(2) Wns Global Services Room No.432, 4Th Floor Pvt.Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan Plant-10, Gate No.4 M.K.Road Vs. Godrej & Boyce Complex Mumbai-400 020 Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli(W) Mumbai-400 079

Section 10ASection 10A(1)Section 9

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N.PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Addl.CIT, Range-10(2) WNS Global Services Room No.432, 4th Floor Pvt.Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan Plant-10, Gate No.4 M.K.Road Vs. Godrej & Boyce Complex Mumbai-400 020 Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli(W) Mumbai-400 079 PAN/GIR No.AAACW2598L Appellant) .. Respondent) & CO.No.44/Mum/2013 (Assessment Year: 2007-08) WNS Global Services Addl.CIT, Range-10(2) Room No.432, 4th Floor Pvt.Ltd. Plant-10, Gate No.4 Aaykar Bhawan Godrej & Boyce Complex Vs. M.K.Road Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli(W) Mumbai-400 02…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Logica Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result appeal and cross objection filed by assessee stands allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 505/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.T.Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143Section 144C

…ceivables has been held to be an international transaction. Referring to discussion in said order, it was stated that Hon’ble Delhi Bench in this case noted a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.), which dealt with question of law: (c) `Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amount to international tran…

DCIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Hindustan Construction Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2432/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Hindustan Construction Co. Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd.,Hincon House, L.B.S. Vs. Income Tax-14(2)(1), Marg, Vikhroli (West), 4Th Floor, Aayakarbhavan, Mumbai-400083. New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaach0968B Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 The D.C.I.T.-14(2)(1), Hindustan Construction 432, Aayakarbhavan, 4Th Vs. Co. Ltd.,Hincon House, 11Th Floor, M.K. Marg, Floor,247 Park, L.B.S. Mumbai-400020. Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Aaach0968B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. H.P. Mahajani / Ms. Shweta Mahadik, ARsFor Respondent: Mr. Anand Mohan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Hindustan Construction Co. Assistant Commissioner of Ltd.,Hincon House, L.B.S. Vs. Income Tax-14(2)(1), Marg, Vikhroli (West), 4th floor, AayakarBhavan, Mumbai-400083. New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACH0968B Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 The D.C.I.T.-14(2)(1), Hindustan Construction 432, AayakarBhavan, 4th Vs. Co. Ltd.,Hincon House, 11th floor, M.K. Marg, Floor,247 Park, L.B.S. Mumbai-400020. Marg, Vikhroli (West),…

Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2351/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Hindustan Construction Co. Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd.,Hincon House, L.B.S. Vs. Income Tax-14(2)(1), Marg, Vikhroli (West), 4Th Floor, Aayakarbhavan, Mumbai-400083. New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaach0968B Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 The D.C.I.T.-14(2)(1), Hindustan Construction 432, Aayakarbhavan, 4Th Vs. Co. Ltd.,Hincon House, 11Th Floor, M.K. Marg, Floor,247 Park, L.B.S. Mumbai-400020. Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Aaach0968B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. H.P. Mahajani / Ms. Shweta Mahadik, ARsFor Respondent: Mr. Anand Mohan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Hindustan Construction Co. Assistant Commissioner of Ltd.,Hincon House, L.B.S. Vs. Income Tax-14(2)(1), Marg, Vikhroli (West), 4th floor, AayakarBhavan, Mumbai-400083. New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACH0968B Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 The D.C.I.T.-14(2)(1), Hindustan Construction 432, AayakarBhavan, 4th Vs. Co. Ltd.,Hincon House, 11th floor, M.K. Marg, Floor,247 Park, L.B.S. Mumbai-400020. Marg, Vikhroli (West),…

DCIT Corporate Circle 3(2), Chennai vs. Verizon Data Services Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 3090/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.3090/Chny/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs M/S. Verizon Data Services Pvt. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., 9Th Floor, Altius Block, Corporate Circle -3(2), Chennai – 34. Olympia Tech Park, Plot No.1, Sidco Industrial, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. Pan: Aabcv 1758N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M. Srinivasa Rao, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sriram Seshadhri, Ca

For Appellant: Shri M. Srinivasa Rao, CITFor Respondent: Shri Sriram Seshadhri, CA
Section 92B(1)

…rged. Under such circumstances, the contention taken by the assessee before the TPO that it is not an international transaction, turns out to be bereft of any force. 23. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.) dealt, inter alia, with the following question of law:- “(c) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amount…

M/S Bt (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 302/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillaii.T.A. No. 442/Del/2016 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) & I.T.A. No. 302/Del/2017 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) Bt (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Circle 5(1), 11Th Floor, New Delhi Eros Corporate Tower, Opp. International Trade Tower Nehru Place, New Delhi -110 019 Gir / Pan :Aabcc4785E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Nageswar Rao, Adv. Ms. Sherry Goyal, Adv. Respondent By : Shri Sanjay I Bara, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.07.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.07.2018 Order Per Beena A. Pillai, Jm: Present Appeals Have Been Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 28/12/15 & Order Dated 09/12/16, Passed By Ld. Acit, Circle 5 (1), New Delhi Under Section 144 (3) Read With Section 144C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 920(2)

…been held to be an international transaction. Referring to the discussion in the said order, it was stated that the Delhi Bench in this case has also noted a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.), which dealt with question of law: (c) `Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by ITA 302/Del/17 A.Y. 2012-13 & ITA 442/Del/16 A.Y. 2011-12 BT (India) Pvt.Ltd. vs. ACIT the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises withou…

M/S. Bt (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 442/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillaii.T.A. No. 442/Del/2016 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) & I.T.A. No. 302/Del/2017 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) Bt (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Circle 5(1), 11Th Floor, New Delhi Eros Corporate Tower, Opp. International Trade Tower Nehru Place, New Delhi -110 019 Gir / Pan :Aabcc4785E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Nageswar Rao, Adv. Ms. Sherry Goyal, Adv. Respondent By : Shri Sanjay I Bara, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.07.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.07.2018 Order Per Beena A. Pillai, Jm: Present Appeals Have Been Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 28/12/15 & Order Dated 09/12/16, Passed By Ld. Acit, Circle 5 (1), New Delhi Under Section 144 (3) Read With Section 144C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 920(2)

…been held to be an international transaction. Referring to the discussion in the said order, it was stated that the Delhi Bench in this case has also noted a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.), which dealt with question of law: (c) `Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by ITA 302/Del/17 A.Y. 2012-13 & ITA 442/Del/16 A.Y. 2011-12 BT (India) Pvt.Ltd. vs. ACIT the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises withou…

Carrier Air-Conditioning & Refrigeneration Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7312/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year : 2005-06 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Assessment Year 2010-11 Assessment Year 2011-12 Assessment Year 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT, DR

…been held to be an international transaction. Referring to the discussion in the said order, it was stated that the Delhi Bench in this case has also noted a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.), which dealt with question of law : (c) `Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amount to international…

M/S Carrier Air-Conditioning & Refrigeration Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2140/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year : 2005-06 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Assessment Year 2010-11 Assessment Year 2011-12 Assessment Year 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT, DR

…been held to be an international transaction. Referring to the discussion in the said order, it was stated that the Delhi Bench in this case has also noted a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Patni Computer Systems Ltd., (2013) 215 Taxmann 108 (Bom.), which dealt with question of law : (c) `Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amount to international…