CIT v. Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd.

56 Taxmann.com 206High Court2015#890 most cited

What is CIT v. Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd. authority for?

When determining the arm's length price for interest on a foreign currency loan advanced to an Associated Enterprise, the Indian Prime Lending Rate is not applicable. Instead, the interest rate should be benchmarked based on the prevailing foreign currency rate, such as EURIBOR, or the rate in the country where the loan is received/consumed.

119

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,244 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd. · Section 92B · arm's length price · interest rate benchmarking · foreign currency loan · associated enterprise loan · PLR rate · EURIBOR rate · loan to AE · transfer pricing adjustment

Also reported as

374 ITR 516230 Taxmann 649

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 144BSection 234BSection 234CSection 271AA

Issues it is cited on

section 92b(1)safe harbour rulessection 72asection 32(2)interest on outstanding receivablessection 92(1)preliminary expensescorporate guaranteesafe harbourcup methodsection 92bsection 115jb(2)

Judgments citing CIT v. Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd.

DCIT 12(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Firstsource Solutions Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 4759/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Firstsource Solutions Income Tax Limited 5Th Floor, Paradigm B 12(2)(1), Room No.223, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Mindspace, Link Road Mk Road, Malad (W) Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 064 Pan/Gir No.Aaaci8904N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) M/S. Firstsource Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Solutions Limited Tax 5Th Floor, Paradigm B 12(2)(1), Room No.223, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Mindspace, Link Road Malad (W) Mk Road, Mumbai – 400 064 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaaci8904N (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM Dy. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Firstsource Solutions Income Tax Limited 5th Floor, Paradigm B 12(2)(1), Room No.223, 2nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Mindspace, Link Road MK Road, Malad (W) Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 064 PAN/GIR No.AAACI8904N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) M/s. Firstsource Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Solutions Limited Tax 5th Floor, Paradigm B 12(2)(1), Room No.223, 2nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Mindspace, Link Road Malad (W) MK Road, Mumbai – 400 064 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAACI8904N (Appella…

DCIT Cen Cir 8(1), Mumbai vs. Allcargo Logistics Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4786/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhdcit. Cc -8(1), M/S Allcargo Logistics Ltd. Room No. 656, 6Th Floor, 5Th Floor, Diamond Square, Cst Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Ropad, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400098 Pan: Aacca2894D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B.V. Jhaveri with Shri I.M. Contractor
Section 253Section 254(1)

…g determined the bench mark and suggested the adjustment of Rs. 1,80,21,952/-. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the adjustment directing the AO/TPO to delete the adjustment on the basis of decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Tata Autocomp System Pvt. Ltd. (374 ITR 516). On the other hand, the ld. and by Mumbai Tribunal in case of Ion Exchange (I) Ltd. vs. ACIT in ITA No. 5109/Mum/2013 and . 9. We have considered the rival contention of the parties and gone through the orders of authorities below. The ld. TPO while making adjustment observed that for Asia Lines Pvt. Ltd. as no details regarding Credit Ratin…

Uttara Foods and Feeds Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 12, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1987/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1987/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Uttara Foods & Feeds Pvt. Ltd. Venkateshwara House, Pune Sihngad Road, Pune-411 030. Pan : Aaacu3663Q .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-12, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Avadhesh Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92B(1)

…fact has also been accepted by the Settlement Commission and not controverted by the Ld. DR. 7. At this stage, it would be relevant to note the ratio laid down by the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 516 ( Bom.) wherein the assessee advanced loans to its AE situated in Germany for which 7 A.Y.2012-13 no interest was charged. The TPO determined the ALP of interest at the rate of 10.25% on the basis of lending rate charged by banks of India. The DRP enhanced the arm‟s length rate of interest to 12%. When the matter came up before the Hon‟ ble High…

M/S.Geetanjali Space Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT CC-1(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 782/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Dilip Lakhani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s. Geetanjali Space Dy. CIT CC-1(1), Pvt. Ltd., Room No.903, B-47, Shakti Dhara 9th Floor, Society, Vs. Pratishtha Bhavan, Colony Road, M.K. Road, Bapu Nagar, Ahmedabad, Mumbai - 400020 Gujarat – 382 350 PAN: AADCG2733L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dy. CIT, M/s. Geetanjali Space Central Circle -1(1), Pvt. Ltd., Room No.903, 9th Floor, B-47, Shakti Dhara Pratishtha Bhavan, Vs. Society, Old C.G.O. Bldg. (Annexe) Colony R…

Moserbaer India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1617/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamblemoserbaer India Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Income Tax Phase-Iii Circle 5(1) New Delhi-110020 New Delhi Aaam0322J (Respondent) (Appellant) Moserbaer India Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Income Tax Phase-Iii Circle 5(1) New Delhi-110020 New Delhi Aaam0322J (Respondent) (Appellant) Astt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs Moserbaer India Ltd. Circle 5(1) Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, New Delhi Phase-Iii New Delhi-110020 (Appellant) Aaam0322J (Respondent) Moserbaer India Ltd. Vs Dcit Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Circle 17(1) Phase-Iii New Delhi New Delhi-110020 (Respondent) Aaam0322J (Appellant)

Section 10BSection 143Section 144CSection 14A

…which loan has to be repaid (PLR is not relevant for foreign currency loans and LIBOR/ EURIBOR only can be considered for benchmarking the same): i. CIT vs Cotton Naturals (1) (P) Ltd.: 231 Taxman 401 (Delhi High Court) ii. CIT vs Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd.: 374 ITR 516 (Mumbai High Court). The Ld. AR further submitted that the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in case of CIT vs. Vaibhav Gems Ltd. 88 taxmann.com 12 held that where assessee extended loan to its AE, adjustment should be made at average LIBOR rate existing at that time, i.e., at 0.79%, instead of LIBOR + 2%. The Ld. AR also relied upon the following ca…

M/S. Moserbaer India Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2395/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamblemoserbaer India Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Income Tax Phase-Iii Circle 5(1) New Delhi-110020 New Delhi Aaam0322J (Respondent) (Appellant) Moserbaer India Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Income Tax Phase-Iii Circle 5(1) New Delhi-110020 New Delhi Aaam0322J (Respondent) (Appellant) Astt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs Moserbaer India Ltd. Circle 5(1) Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, New Delhi Phase-Iii New Delhi-110020 (Appellant) Aaam0322J (Respondent) Moserbaer India Ltd. Vs Dcit Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Circle 17(1) Phase-Iii New Delhi New Delhi-110020 (Respondent) Aaam0322J (Appellant)

Section 10BSection 143Section 144CSection 14A

…which loan has to be repaid (PLR is not relevant for foreign currency loans and LIBOR/ EURIBOR only can be considered for benchmarking the same): i. CIT vs Cotton Naturals (1) (P) Ltd.: 231 Taxman 401 (Delhi High Court) ii. CIT vs Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd.: 374 ITR 516 (Mumbai High Court). The Ld. AR further submitted that the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in case of CIT vs. Vaibhav Gems Ltd. 88 taxmann.com 12 held that where assessee extended loan to its AE, adjustment should be made at average LIBOR rate existing at that time, i.e., at 0.79%, instead of LIBOR + 2%. The Ld. AR also relied upon the following ca…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Moser Baer India Limited, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1200/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamblemoserbaer India Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Income Tax Phase-Iii Circle 5(1) New Delhi-110020 New Delhi Aaam0322J (Respondent) (Appellant) Moserbaer India Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Income Tax Phase-Iii Circle 5(1) New Delhi-110020 New Delhi Aaam0322J (Respondent) (Appellant) Astt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs Moserbaer India Ltd. Circle 5(1) Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, New Delhi Phase-Iii New Delhi-110020 (Appellant) Aaam0322J (Respondent) Moserbaer India Ltd. Vs Dcit Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Circle 17(1) Phase-Iii New Delhi New Delhi-110020 (Respondent) Aaam0322J (Appellant)

Section 10BSection 143Section 144CSection 14A

…which loan has to be repaid (PLR is not relevant for foreign currency loans and LIBOR/ EURIBOR only can be considered for benchmarking the same): i. CIT vs Cotton Naturals (1) (P) Ltd.: 231 Taxman 401 (Delhi High Court) ii. CIT vs Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd.: 374 ITR 516 (Mumbai High Court). The Ld. AR further submitted that the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in case of CIT vs. Vaibhav Gems Ltd. 88 taxmann.com 12 held that where assessee extended loan to its AE, adjustment should be made at average LIBOR rate existing at that time, i.e., at 0.79%, instead of LIBOR + 2%. The Ld. AR also relied upon the following ca…

Moserbaer India Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 6042/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamblemoserbaer India Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Income Tax Phase-Iii Circle 5(1) New Delhi-110020 New Delhi Aaam0322J (Respondent) (Appellant) Moserbaer India Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Income Tax Phase-Iii Circle 5(1) New Delhi-110020 New Delhi Aaam0322J (Respondent) (Appellant) Astt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs Moserbaer India Ltd. Circle 5(1) Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, New Delhi Phase-Iii New Delhi-110020 (Appellant) Aaam0322J (Respondent) Moserbaer India Ltd. Vs Dcit Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Circle 17(1) Phase-Iii New Delhi New Delhi-110020 (Respondent) Aaam0322J (Appellant)

Section 10BSection 143Section 144CSection 14A

…which loan has to be repaid (PLR is not relevant for foreign currency loans and LIBOR/ EURIBOR only can be considered for benchmarking the same): i. CIT vs Cotton Naturals (1) (P) Ltd.: 231 Taxman 401 (Delhi High Court) ii. CIT vs Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd.: 374 ITR 516 (Mumbai High Court). The Ld. AR further submitted that the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in case of CIT vs. Vaibhav Gems Ltd. 88 taxmann.com 12 held that where assessee extended loan to its AE, adjustment should be made at average LIBOR rate existing at that time, i.e., at 0.79%, instead of LIBOR + 2%. The Ld. AR also relied upon the following ca…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Guntur vs. Ccl Product (India) Private Limited, Guntur

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 191/VIZ/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.191/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-14) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Ccl Products (India) Income-Tax, Circle-1(1) Pvt. Ltd. Guntur Duggirala Post & Mandal Guntur [Pan :Aaacc9552G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri K.C.Das, Dr प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri K.Ramesh Babu, Ar सुनिाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 19.09.2018 28 .09.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Das, DRFor Respondent: Shri K.Ramesh Babu, AR

…adjustment is warranted. The Ld.CIT(A) relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Cotton Naturals (I) Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 55 taxmann.com 523 (Delhi), Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. TATA Auto Comp Systems Ltd. 374 ITR 516 (Bombay), the decision of ITAT Chennai Bench in the case of Siva Industries and Holding Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2011) 11 taxmann.com 404 (Chennai). For the sake of clarity and convenience, we extract relevant part of the order of the Ld.CIT(A) which reads as under : “M/s. CCL Products (India) Ltd., is engaged in the business of Manufacturing of Instant C…

M/S Instrumentarium Corporation Ltd., Kolkata vs. DDIT (It)-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1548/KOL/2009[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Aug 2018AY 2003-2004

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Assessment Year: 2003-04 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Instrumentarium Corporation Limited………………..………………………………..……….……....Appellant P.O. Box 100, Fi-00031 Ge, Finland Cc: Pricewterhouse Coopers South City Pinnacle 7Th Floor Plot No.Xi-I Sector V Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan : Aadcg 1535 E] Ddit (I.T.)-1(1), Kolkata.….....................................................................................….......….......Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sachit Jolly, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit, D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 27Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 3Rd , 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xvi, Kolkata Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The ‘Act’), Dt. 09/06/2009. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Assessment Year Of This Common Order. 2. The Appeals Bearing No’S Ita No. 1548 & 1549/Kol/2009 , For The Assessment Year 2003-04 & 2004-05, Were Referred By The Hon’Ble, Itat To A Special Bench Vide Order Dt. 6Th April, 2010, To Answer The Following Re-Framed Question.

Section 250

…on conversion of the same into Indian rupees after the remittance is received in its Indian bank account. He submitted that the loan was consumed in India. He relied on the Hon’ble Bombay High Court judgement in the case of CIT vs. TATA Autocomps Systems Ltd. 374 ITR 516 Bom. wherein it was held that , where the Indian resident assessee had advanced a loan to its associate enterprise (AE) situated in Germany, the rate was directed to be determined on the basis of the rates prevailing in Germany, as that was the country in which the loan in question was consumed. He submitted that since the loan in question was co…

Piramal Enterprises Limited, Mumbai vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax-7(1), Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5471/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Jahangir Mistry, Sr. Counsel a/wFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(3)Section 80I

…he AE, PLR prevailing in India cannot be applied for determining the arm's length price of the interest chargeable to the A.E. In support of such contention, the learned Sr. Counsel relied upon the following decisions:– i) CIT v/s Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd., 374 ITR 516 (Bom.); ii) CIT v/s Cotton Naturals (I) Pvt. Ltd., 231 taxmann.com 401 (Del.); iii) CIT v/s Aurinpro Solutions Ltd., ITA no.1869/2014 dated 06.09.2017 (Bom.); and iv) Everest Kanto Cylinder Ltd. v/s ACIT, 167 TTJ 204 (Mum.). 70. We have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record. Undisputedly, the AE of the assessee is located…

Kpit Technologies Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 594/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.594/Pn/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Kpit Technologies Limited, (Earlier Known As Kpit Cummins Infosystems Ltd.) Plot No.35/36, Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Phase I, Midc, Hinjewadi Phase 1 Rd, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411057 …. Pan: Aaack7308N Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle -14, Pune

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण पुणे न्यायपीठ “ऐ” पुणे में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE सुश्री सुषमा चावऱा, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री अयिऱ चतुवेदी, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA No.594/PN/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 KPIT Technologies Limited, (earlier known as KPIT Cummins Infosystems Ltd.) Plot No.35/36, Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Phase I, MIDC, Hinjewadi Phase 1 Rd, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411057 …. PAN: AAACK7308N Vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle -14, Pune अऩीऱाथी की ओ…

Nrb Bearings Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3770/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Sandeep Gosain (Jm)

Section 139(1)Section 23Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” Bench, Mumbai Before S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Sandeep Gosain (JM) I.T.A. No. 3770/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 3785/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2010-11) M/s. NRB Bearings Ltd. Addl.CIT- Dhanur, 15 Vs. 2(2)/DCIT Sir P.M. Road (OSD)-2(3) Mumbai-400 001. Mumbai PAN No. AAACN3479P (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 4133/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2010-11) I.T.A. No. 4134/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2009-10) DCIT(OSD)-2(3) M/s. NRB Bearings Ltd. Mumbai Vs. Dhanur, 15 Sir P.M. Road Mumbai-400 001. PAN No. AAACN3479P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by S…

DCIT, Cir-36, Kolkata vs. M/S the Trustees, Estate of Late R. D. Mehta, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed as indicated above

ITA 1268/KOL/2015[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2013-2014

Bench: : Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravia.Y 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kalyan Nath, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri P.J. Bhide, FCA, Ld.AR
Section 115JSection 143(1)

…e acted without knowledge of the matters as decided by the Hon'ble ITAT in the earlier years. The A.R's contention that the rule of consistency emerging from the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT-vs- Tata Auto comp Systems Ltd., reported in 374 ITR 516 (Para-7) has necessary strength, and is required to be followed. Accordingly, I find that the order of the AO( CPC) is beyond the purview of Sec 143( 1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as also not in conformity with the 3 M/s. The Trustees Estate of Late R.D.Mehta decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in the assessees' own case. I therefore cancel the said…

M/S Subex Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

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

ITA 572/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Roti, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Parbat, CIT-3(DR)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.572/Bang/2017 Assessment Year :2012-13 M/s. Subex Limited, RMZ Ecoworld, The Deputy Devarabisanahalli, Commissioner of Income Outer Ring Road, Vs. Tax, Bangalore – 560 037. Circle 6(1)(2), Bangalore. PAN: AABCS 9255R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Ajay Roti, CA Revenue by : Shri R.N. Parbat, CIT-3(DR) Date of hearing : 24.10.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 26.10.2017 O R D E R Per Shri A.K. Garodia, Accountant Member This appeal is filed by the…

Geodesic Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT -8(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1234/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1234/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Geodesic Limited, Dcit – 8(1), बनाम/ B-3, Lunic Industries, Mumbai. V. Midc, Cross Road B, Opp Sbi, Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400 093. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacb6163A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mrs. Malathi Sridharan, DR
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “K” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1234/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Geodesic Limited, DCIT – 8(1), बनाम/ B-3, Lunic Industries, Mumbai. v. MIDC, Cross Road B, Opp SBI, Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400 093. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AAACB6163A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Mrs. Malathi Sridharan, DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date of Hearing : 14-02-2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement…

Everest Kanto Cylinder Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Ltu) 1, Mumbai

ITA 1131/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2016AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand-CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ केकेकेके” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“K”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, , , , शि"जीत डे एवं शि"जीत डे शि"जीत डे, "याियक शि"जीत डे "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Saktijit Dey,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/ ITA No.1131/Mum/2015 : िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2010-11 वष" M/s…

Subex Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 373/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. Ramakotaiah & Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhury

For Appellant: Shri Raghunathan S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-II(DR)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 35D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR CHOUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 373/Bang/2015 Assessment year : 2010-11 M/s. Subex Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of RMZ Ecoworld, Income Tax, Outer Ring Road, Circle 6(1)(2), Devarabisanahalli, Bangalore. Bangalore. PAN: AABCS 9255R APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(TP)A No. 374/Bang/2015 Assessment year : 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Subex Limited, Income Tax, Bangalore. Circle 6(1)(2), PAN: AABCS 9255R Bangalore. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Raghunatha…

Arshiya International Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 8(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 659/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri J.P. BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Akhilendra P Yadad, DR
Section 92BSection 92C

…itted that interest rate applicable should be only the „LIBOR‟ of the respective country, where the loans was consumed. In this regard, he relied on the judgment of the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd [2015] 374 ITR 516 (Bombay), which is relevant for the following proposition: “Where assessee advanced loans to its AE situated in Germany, rate of interest was to be determined on basis of rate prevailing in Germany where loan had been consumed.” 4. Further, relying on the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd vs. Addl. CIT [2014] 43 taxman…