How many judgments cite CIT v. Pentair Water India (P.) Ltd.?

69 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Pentair Water India (P.) Ltd. (381 ITR 216), spanning 2016 to 2025.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 144C(13), Section 234B, Section 10B(2)(a), Section 10B(3), Section 133(6).

CIT v. Pentair Water India (P.) Ltd.

381 ITR 216High Court2016#1651 most cited

What is CIT v. Pentair Water India (P.) Ltd. authority for?

Companies with significantly higher turnover, indicating differing functional and risk profiles, are not comparable for transfer pricing benchmarking. Such large companies must be excluded from the list of comparables when benchmarking against an assessee with a much smaller turnover.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Pentair Water India (P.) Ltd. · Pentair Water India · transfer pricing · comparable companies · turnover filter · exclusion of comparables · functional risk profile · Section 92C(2) · benchmarking · transactional net margin method

Also reported as

69 Taxmann.com 180

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234B Section 10B(2)(a)Section 10B(3)Section 133(6)Section 144B Section 144C(3)

Issues it is cited on

captive service provider software technology park multiple year data advance pricing agreement resale price method cost plus method section 92c(2)functional analysis transactional net margin method interest u/s 234c working capital adjustment section 271(l)

Judgments citing CIT v. Pentair Water India (P.) Ltd.

GBT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT,OSD, DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed as above

ITA 1764/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1764/Del/2022, A.Y. 2018-19 GBT India Private Limited Assistant Commissioner G-21, Ground Floor, of Income Tax, OSD, Salcon Rasvilas, Plot No. D-1, Vs. Civic Centre, Minto Road, Saket District Centre, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AAFCG5409D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Prashant Meharchandani, Adv. Shri Jinendra Kataria, Advocate Respondent by Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT(DR) Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21/11/2025 Da…

ACIT, CIRCLE 3(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. XORIANT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 540/MUM/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Toprani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year 2012-13 ACIT, Circle 3(3)(1) Xoriant Solutions Private Room No. 522, 5th Floor, Limited Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 7th Floor, 7A & 7B, C wing, Time Mumbai 400020. Vs. Square Building, Mittal Estate, Marol Naka, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri East, Mumbai 500059 PAN: AAACX0146P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri Pankaj Toprani, Advocate Revenue : Shri Asif Karmali, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 01.05.2025 Date of…

ACIT, CIRCLE 3(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. XORIANT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 539/MUM/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Toprani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

GRIPTONITE GAMES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-2(1) , HYDERABAD

ITA 199/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad02 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.P.Chidambaram, ARFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-

Section 143(3)Section 144(5)Section 92C

…the turnover of the assessee and the selected comparables, indicating a difference in their functional risk profiles. Our aforesaid view is supported by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs. Pentair Water India (P) Ltd [2016] 381 ITR 216 (Bombay). The High Court had while confirming the view taken by the Tribunal, inter alia, held that as the comparables selected by the Department were no doubt large and distinct companies, therefore, the profit earned therefrom cannot be benchmarked or equated with that of the assessee company. In the case before them, the Tribunal had observed…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. FIS GLOBAL BUSINESS SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the revenue stand dismissed and both Cos are allowed as above

ITA 2387/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I’: NEW DELHI BEFORESHRISUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.5939/Del./2012, A.Y. 2007-08 ITA No.2387/Del./2014, A.Y. 2008-09 Dy. Commissioner FIS Global Business Solution India of Income Tax, (P) Ltd.[formerly known as E-Funds Circle 11(1), Vs. International India (P) Ltd.] Room No. 312, S-405 (LGF), Greater Kailash, Part-II C.R.Building, New Delhi-110048 New Delhi PAN: AAACH2815H (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 03/Del/2013 (Arising out of ITA No.5939/Del./2012, A.Y. 2007-08) C.O. No. 02/Del/2015 (Arising out o…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. FIS GLOBAL BUSINESS SOLUTION INDIA (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the revenue stand dismissed and both Cos are allowed as above

ITA 5939/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: SHRISUDHIR KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

DSM SHARED SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 501/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Aliasgar Rampurawala, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…आआआआ आआआआआआ आआआआआआ, आआआआआआआआ आआआ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.501/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2018-19) M/s. DSM Shared Services India Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad. Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. PAN: AADCD8407C (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri Aliasgar Rampurawala, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of hearing: 06/03/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 05/05/2…

OSI SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 2379/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.2379/Hyd/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Darpan Kirpalani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.Balakrishna, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No.2379/Hyd/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) OSI Systems Private Dy.Commissioner of Limited Vs. Income Tax, Hyderabad Circle-16(2), [PAN : AAACO4438M] Hyderabad अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा/Assessee by: Shri Darpan Kirpalani, AR राजस्‍व द्वारा/Revenue by: Shri B.Balakrishna, CIT-DR सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 01/10/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Pronouncement on:…

PRIMERA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 381/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri PVSS Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Smt. L. Sunitha Rao, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No. 381/Hyd/2022 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Primera Medical Technologies Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Private Limited, Income Tax, Hyderabad Circle-5(1), [PAN No. AAICP1509J] Hyderabad अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा / Assessee by: Shri PVSS Prasad, AR राजस्‍व द्वारा / Revenue by: Smt. L. Sunitha Rao, CIT-DR सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 19/06/2024 घो…

TRINITI ADVANCED SOFTWARELABS PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERS ,WARD -2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 397/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Kranthi, ARFor Respondent: Smt. L. Sunitha Rao, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No. 397/Hyd/2021 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Triniti Advanced Software Labs Vs. Income Tax Officer, Private Limited, Ward-2(4), Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN No. AAACE7968E] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा / Assessee by: Shri Kranthi, AR राजस्‍व द्वारा / Revenue by: Smt. L. Sunitha Rao, CIT-DR (appeared through virtual mode) सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 21…

ISOFT HEALTH MANAGEMENT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 976/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.976/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Isoft Health Management India Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, 4Th Floor, Capital . Income Tax, Towers, No. 180, Kodambakkam High Corporate Circle 2(2), Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aalcs8600A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Vikram Vijayaragahavan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 23.02.2015 Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaragahavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 143(3)

…ACIT 2015 SCC OnLine P&H 10135 and held that the Companies having turnover of more than 23 times of the assessee's turnover cannot be compared with the assessee. The decision of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s.Pentair Water India Pvt. Ltd [(2016) 381 ITR 216] was also taken note of in PCIT Vs. Sanvih Info Group Private Limited (I.T. Appeal No.420 of 2019 (Del. HC) dated 16.05.2019. The Court noted the discussion in Chry Capital Investment Advisors India (P.) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, [2015 376 ITR 183 (Del)], wherein it was stated that Infosys Technologies Ltd. cannot be compared wi…

PAREXEL INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 488/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Aliasgar Rampurwala &For Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA-TP No. 488/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Parexel International Asst. Commissioner of (India) Private Limited, Vs. Income Tax, Hyderabad Circle-5(1), [PAN No. AAECP2199N] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri Aliasgar Rampurwala & Shri Yogesh Malpani, ARs रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/…

INFOR (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 193/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita-Tp No. 193/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Infor (India) Private Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Hyderabad Of Income Tax, [Pan No. Aaacb6197Q] Circle-2(1), Hyderabad अपीलार्थीर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Moti Lala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 260

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA-TP No. 193/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Infor (India) Private Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Hyderabad of Income Tax, [PAN No. AAACB6197Q] Circle-2(1), Hyderabad अपीलार्थीर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent स्‍थथगन आवेदन सं. / S.A. No. 58/Hyd/2023 (Arising out of ITA No. 193/Hyd/2023) (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Infor (India) Private Limited, Vs The Deputy…

SERCO INDIA PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. DCIT, GURGAON

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1432/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shrianil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Ld. CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE SHRIANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AM & SHRI N. K. CHOUDHRY, JM I.T.A. No. 1432/Del/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12) Serco India Pvt. Ltd. DCIT Circle-4(1), 3rd Floor, Vanijya Nikunj, C/o Traveltime Car Rental Pvt. Ltd., Office No. 105, HSIIDC Building, Udyog Astral Court, B Wing, Near Vs. Vihar, Phase-V, Near Gaikwad Petrol Pump, Shankar Chowk, NH-8, Sanewadi, Aundh, Pune- Gurgaon. 411007. PAN No.AAJCS6704P (Appellant) (Respondent) : Appellant by : Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Ld. Adv &Sh. Mahfuzur Rehman, Ld. CA Respondent by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Ld. CIT…

QAD INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 9(3), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No. 1 raised by the Appellant is disposed off as being general in nature, Ground No. 2 relating to selection of comparables is partly allowed in terms of paragraph 5 to 6

ITA 4098/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Ms. Chandni Shah, Ms. RiddhiFor Respondent: Dr. Samuel Pitta

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…of the Appellant which stood at INR 14.98 Crores during the relevant previous year. In support, the Learned Authorised Representative for Appellant relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Pentair Wat India (Pvt.) Ltd.: 381 ITR 216 while in response, the Learned Departmental Representative placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai Vs. Same Deutz-Fahr India (Pvt.) Ltd. : [2018] 89 taxmann.com 47 (Madras). 5.1. On perusal of the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pentair Wat India…

IMEDX INFORMATION SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1755/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita-Tp No. 1755/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: Shri H. Srinivasulu, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…The above entities were found to be excluded from the list of comparables on the ground of huge turnover. 9. In support of his contentions, he also placed reliance on the decisions of Avaya India P. Ltd. [2019] 416 ITR 638 (Del), Pentair Water India (P) Ltd. 381 ITR 216 (Bom), Agnity India Technologies (P) Ltd. 36 Taxmann.com 289, Evalueserve SEZ (Gurgaon)(P) Ltd. 416 ITR 51 (Del), Soft Brands India (P) Ltd. 406 ITR 513 (Kar), Quicklogic Software India (P) Ltd. in IT(TP)A No. 181/Bang/2022, AY. 2017-18, Samsung R&D Institute Bangalore (P) Ltd 431 ITR 615 (Kar), Eurofins IT Solutions India (P) Ltd. in IT(TP)A No.…

VELOCITY TECH- SOL INDIA PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TP-2)2, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 218/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Tejas Dharwadkar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Gadekar

Section 144C(5)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…company reflected in terms of its turnover is one of the relevant criteria for comparability. This is because a company's ability to bear risk increases with the size of the company. It is pertinent to mention that in the case of Pentair Water India Pvt Ltd (381 ITR 216), the Hon'ble Bombay High Court upheld the decision of the Tribunal that size and turnover of a company are deciding factors for treating a company as a comparable. The CBDT has also taken note of this factor in the Safe Harbour Rules, which provide high percentage of net margin for companies whose turnover exceeds Rs.500 Cr as against those whic…

M/S. IG INFOTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 204/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 92C

…the Tribunal after noticing the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Chryscapital Investment Advisors (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra) and the decision to the contrary in the case of CIT v. Pentair Water India (P.) Ltd ., [2016] 69 taxmann.com 180/381 ITR 216 (Bom.) wherein it was held that high turnover is a ground to exclude a company from the list of comparable companies in determining ALP, held that there were contrary views on the issue and hence the view favourable to the Assessee laid down in the case of Pentair Water India (P.) Ltd. (supra) should be adopted. The following were the conclusions…

CITRIX R & D INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 220/BANG/2021[2016-17`]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2022

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 220/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Citrix R&D India Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Prestige Dynasty, Commissioner Of Ground Floor, Income Tax, 33/2, Ulsoor Road, Circle – 2(1)(1), Bangalore – 560042. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcn3639C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sumit Khurana, Ca Revenue By : Shri M. Mathivanan, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04-07-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 25-08-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal By The Assessee Has Been Filed By Assessee Against The Assessment Order Dated 30/03/2021 Passed By The National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2016-17 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Herein By The Appellant Are Without Prejudice To One Another. 1. That The Order Passed By The Learned Ao To The Extent Prejudicial To The Appellant, Is Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed. Transfer Pricing - 2. That The National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Bangalore ("Assessing Officer" Or "Learned Ao") & The Dispute Resolution Panel - 1 ("Learned Panel" Or "Learned Drp")

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Khurana, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, CIT-DR

M/S QUICKLOGIC SOFTWARE (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 181/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 181/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Quicklogic Software (India) Pvt. Ltd., No. 10 Brindavan, The Deputy 3Rd Floor, Commissioner Of Yashoda Nagar Main Income Tax, Road, Circle 3(1)(1), Jakkur Plantation, Vs. Bangalore. Bengaluru – 560 064. Pan: Aaacq0656P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Mahaveer C Jain, Ca : Shri Sumer Singh Meena Cit Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 12-07-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 27-07-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 25/01/2022 By The National Faceless Assessment Centre For A.Y. 2017-18 On Following Revised Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Mahaveer C Jain, CA

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 92C

Showing 1–20 of 69 · Page 1 of 4