How many judgments cite CIT v. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd.?

47 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd. (381 ITR 413), spanning 2016 to 2024.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 115JB, Section 143(3), Section 144C(13), Section 271(1)(c), Section 92C(1), Section 92C(2).

CIT v. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd.

381 ITR 413High Court2016#2451 most cited

What is CIT v. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Transfer pricing adjustments must be restricted to international transactions with associated enterprises and cannot be made at the entity level or in respect of transactions with unrelated parties.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd. · 381 ITR 413 · Section 92C · Section 92CA · transfer pricing adjustment · entity level adjustment · associated enterprise · international transaction · arm's length price · unrelated parties

Sections most often in play

Section 115JB Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C(1)Section 92C(2)Section 92C(3)Section 92CA(1)

Issues it is cited on

transfer pricing adjustment arm's length price associated enterprise associated enterprises tnmm section 92 section 92ca section 92c international transaction dispute resolution panel transfer prescribed

Judgments citing CIT v. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd.

Limagrain India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle -5(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 464/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. (Accountant Member), Shri K. Narasimha Chary (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri R.Srinivasulu, ARFor Respondent: : Shri B.Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

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

…P without considering the objections filed by the assessee, made TP adjustments at entity level, even though it is well settled principle of law by the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Thyssen Krupp Industries India (P) Ltd. 381 ITR 413 (Bom) that, TP adjustment should be restricted to the transactions with AE, but not at entity level. Therefore, he submitted that the additions made by the Ld.TPO and confirmed by the Ld.DRP should be deleted. He further submitted that, without prejudice to the above, the matter may be set aside to the file of the Ld.TPO to consider the evidences…

Ims Health Analytics Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 300/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyit(Tp)A No.300/Bang/2022

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Tolani & Sri Darpan Kriplani, CAFor Respondent: Shri A Sreenivasa Rao, CIT (DR)

…integra in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Phoenix Mecano (India) (P.) Ltd. [2019] 108 taxmann.com 124/265 Taxman 354/414 ITR 704 and in the case of CIT v. ThyssenKrupp Industries (P.) Ltd. [2016] 70 taxmann.com 329/381 ITR 413 (Bom.) and CIT v. Tara Jewels Exports (P.) Ltd. [2017] 80 taxmann.com 117/[2016] 381 ITR 404 (Bom.). 6.7 In any case we find that the issue in dispute is squarely covered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee's own case for the A.Y.2011-12 in Comm Vault Systems (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2018] 92 taxmann.com 350 (Hyd. - Trib.)…

Mos Metro India Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in IT(TP)A No

ITA 2797/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Senguttuvan, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. D. Komali Krishna, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…he ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the issue is covered in favour of assessee by the decisions of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Alstom Projects India Ltd., [2017] 394 ITR 141, CIT vs. Thyssen Krupp Industries India Pvt. Ltd., [2016] 381 ITR 413 and ITAT, Chennai in the case of Yongsan Automotive India Pvt. Ltd., vs. ACIT in ITA No.357/Mds/2017. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Alstom Projects India Ltd., supra, has held as under:- "We are in respectful agreement with the view of the Delhi High Court in Keihin Panalfa Ltd. (Supra). One must not loose sight of the fact that th…

Commvault Systems (India) Private, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 282/HYD/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita-Tp No. 282/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Commvault Systems (India) Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Hyderabad Circle-1(1), [Pan : Aaccc3708L] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri D. Prabhakar Reddy, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 115Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA-TP No. 282/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Commvault Systems (India) Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Private Limited, Income Tax, Hyderabad Circle-1(1), [PAN : AACCC3708L] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri D. Prabhakar Reddy, AR रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of hearing: 10/04/2023…

Ala Chemicals P. Ltd., Palghar vs. Dy CIT-5(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 7950/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

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

…d AR submitted that the TPO has made the adjustment at entity level, i.e., on the transactions entered with non-AE also. By placing reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 413, the learned AR submitted that the transfer pricing adjustment should be restricted to the international transactions entered with AEs only. 10. We have heard learned DR on this issue and perused the record. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the above said case, has held that the transfer 8 ALA Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. pricing adjustment is mandate…

M/S. Vishay Components India Private Limited, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 12, Pune

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 213/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Kalika Singh (through virtual)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 253

…cano (India) Pvt. Ltd. has since been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Phoenix Mecano (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 402 ITR 32 (St.). Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 413 (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Tara Jewels Exports (P). Ltd. (2010) 381 ITR 404 (Bom.). We, therefore, direct to restrict the transfer pricing addition only in respect of transactions with Associated Enterprises.” 6 ITA 213 of 2022 – Vishay Components A.Y. 2017-18 7. The ld. Counsel submitted that identical facts and the business activities also appear for…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Pune vs. Franke Faber India Pvt. Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal the Revenue is allowed and the cross

ITA 161/PUN/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs. Franke Faber India Private Limited, Pune 1086/1 & 1086/2, Nagar Road, Village Sanaswadi, Taluka Shirur, Pune 412 208, Maharashtra Pan : Aaacf4002G Appellant Respondent

…nt’s SLP against the judgment in the case of Phoenix Mecano (India) Pvt. Ltd. has since been dismissed by the Hon’ble (2018) 402 ITR 32 (St.). Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 413 (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Tara Jewels 7 And CO No.21/PUN/ 2022 Frank Faber India India Pvt. Ltd., Exports (P). Ltd. (2010) 381 ITR 404 (Bom.). We, therefore, set aside the impugned order on this score and direct that the transfer pricing adjustment should be restricted only to the extent of the international transactions. 11. To sum up, the impugne…

Rieter India Pvt.Ltd, Satara vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 5, Pune

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 127/PUN/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16

Section 143(3)

…o (India) Pvt. Ltd. has since been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Phoenix Mecano (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 402 ITR 32 (St.). Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 413 (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Tara Jewels Exports (P). Ltd. (2010) 381 ITR 404 (Bom.). We, therefore, set aside the impugned order on this score and direct that the transfer pricing adjustment should be restricted only to the value of international transactions. 12 Rieter India Private Limited 10. To sum up, the impugned order on the issue of transfer…

Dhl Logistics P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 9(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 7286/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaledhl Logistics Pvt Ltd Vs. Acit – 9(3)(1) 201A, Silver Utopia, Room No. 215, Cardinal Gracias Road 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Chakala, Andheri (E) Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400099 Mumbai – 400020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacm6824A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Madhur Agarwal.Ar Respondent By : Dr. Yogesh Kamat.Cit.Dr Date Of Hearing 27.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 15.03.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm:

For Appellant: Shri. Madhur Agarwal.ARFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat.CIT.DR

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

…cerned, we are persuaded to be in agreement with the same. In fact, we find that the Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT-8, Mumbai Vs. Tara Jewells Export (P) Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 404 (Bom) and CIT Vs. Thyssen Crup Industries India Pvt. ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 413 (Bom), had clearly observed, that in terms of Chapter X of the Act the TP adjustment is mandated only in respect of International transactions and not the transactions entered into by the assessee with independent unrelated parties. In DHL Logistics P Ltd, Mumbai. fact, we find that in case if a TP adjustment is allowed in respect of transactions…

Mubea Automotive Components India Private Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 260/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.260/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

Section 143(3)

…ive Components India Pvt. Ltd., dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Phoenix Mecano (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 402 ITR 32 (St.). Similar view has been espoused by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 413 (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Tara Jewels Exports (P). Ltd. (2010) 381 ITR 404 (Bom.). We, ergo, direct to restrict the transfer pricing addition only to the extent of international transaction under consideration. 14. To sum up, we set-aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of AO/TPO for re-determining the ALP of the international…

M/S. Hyundai Construction Equipment India P. Ltd., Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune

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

ITA 584/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Acit, Circle 9, Vs. M/S. Hyundai Construction Pune Equipment India Private Limited Plot No.A-2, Chakan Midc, Phase-Ii, Chakan-Talegaon Road, Village- Khalumbre, Tal-Khed, Pune – 410501 Pan: Aabch8756Q Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Hyundai Construction Equipment Vs. Acit, Circle 9, India Private Limited Pune Plot No.A-2, Chakan Midc, Phase-Ii, Chakan-Talegaon Road, Village- Khalumbre, Tal-Khed, Pune – 410501 Pa N: Aabch8756Q Appellant Respondent Corrigendum Per R.S.Syal, Vp :

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…ainst this judgment has since been dismissed by the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Phoenix Mecano (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 402 ITR 32 (St.). Similar view has been espoused by the Hon‘ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 413 (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Tara Jewels Exports (P). Ltd. (2010) 381 ITR 404 (Bom.). We, ergo, direct to restrict the transfer pricing addition only to the extent of international transactions in this segment. 29. To sum up, the transfer pricing addition made in the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the AO/TPO for re-co…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune vs. M/S. Hyundai Construction Equipment India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

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

ITA 537/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

M/S. Hyundai Consttruction Equipment India Private Limited, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 9, Pune

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2453/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Hyundai Construction Equipment Vs. Acit, Circle 9, India Private Limited Pune Plot No.A-2, Chakan Midc, Phase-Ii, Khalumbre, Chakan-Talegaon Road, Chakan, Taluka-Khed, Pune – 410501 Pan: Aabch8756Q Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…against this judgment has since been dismissed by the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Phoenix Mecano (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 402 ITR 32 (St.). Similar view has been taken by the Hon‘ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 413 (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Tara Jewels Exports (P). Ltd. (2010) 381 ITR 404 (Bom.). We, therefore, direct the AO/TPO to restrict the transfer pricing addition to the extent of international transactions under the segment of ‗Manufacturing activity‘. 12.1. The assessee has raised the following additional ground, which reads as under: Ground of appeal 10…

M/S. Tasty Bite Eatables Limited, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 7, Pune

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1823/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…ainst this judgment has since been dismissed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Phoenix Mecano (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 402 ITR 32 (St.). Similar view has been espoused by the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 413 (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Tara Jewels Exports (P). Ltd. (2010) 381 ITR 404 (Bom.). We, ergo, direct to restrict the transfer pricing addition only to the extent of international transactions in this segment. 11. The next issue raised before the Tribunal is about not granting working capital adjustment. Shorn of unnecessary details, it is noted that the…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 6, Pune vs. M/S. Stauff India Private Limited, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2391/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1171/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Mahadevan A.M. Krishnan

Section 92E

…nal transaction with Associated Enterprises. The Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs. Magna Steyr India P. Ltd. had occasion to refer the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Thysseen Krupp Industries India Pvt. Ltd., 381 ITR 413 wherein it has been held the transfer pricing adjustment, if any, has to be made vis-à-vis associated enterprises transaction and not on entity level. Accordingly, Pune Bench of the Tribunal directed AO/TPO to re-compute the ALP of international A.Ys.2012-13 & 2013-14 transactions of the assessee with its associated enterprises on the basis of t…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune vs. M/S. Stauff India Pvt.Ltd, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1357/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1171/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Mahadevan A.M. Krishnan

Section 92E

Stauff India Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1171/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1171/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Mahadevan A.M. Krishnan

Section 92E

Agility Logistics P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Range-9(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 7199/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodagility Logistics Private Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Polaris, A-501/502, 5Th Floor, Income Tax Circle 9(1)(1), Off Marol Maroshi Road, Marol, Mumbai, Room No. 210/260A, Vs. Andheri (East), 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 059 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan – Aaacl3717A (Appellant) (Respondent) Agility Logistics Private Limited Asstt. Commissioner Of Polaris, A-501/502, 5Th Floor, Income Tax, Range 9(1)(1), Off Marol Maroshi Road, Marol, Room No. 203, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Andheri (East), Mumbai 400 067 Aayakar Bhavan,M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020

For Appellant: S/sshri Dhanesh Bafna, Ketan Ved, Nishant Shah &For Respondent: S/shri Sunil Deshpande & Sushil Kr. Mishra, D.Rs

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C(2)

…a Jewells Export (P) Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 404 (Bom) and CIT Vs. Thyssen Crup P a g e | 21 ITA No.7199/Mum/2017 & ITA No. 6679/Mum/2018 AYs. 2013-14 and 2014-15 Agility Logistics Private Limited Vs. DCIT, Circle 9(1)(1) Mumbai Industries India Pvt. ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 413 (Bom), had clearly observed, that in terms of Chapter X of the Act the TP adjustment is mandated only in respect of International transactions and not the transactions entered into by the assessee with independent unrelated parties. We find that in case if a TP adjustment is allowed in respect of transactions entered into by the assessee with unr…

Synechron Technologies Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 6, Pune

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

ITA 1692/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 1692/Pun/2018 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Synechron Technologies Private Limited Cedar Building, Ascendas International, Tech Park Pune, Plot No.18, Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Hinjewadi, Phase-Iii, Pune-411 057. Pan : Aaics2894R .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-6, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri M.P. LohiaFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena

Section 144C(5)Section 92C(2)

…al transaction with Associated Enterprises. The Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs. Magna Steyr India P. Ltd. had occasion to refer the decision of the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Thysseen Krupp Industries India Pvt. Ltd., 381 ITR 413 wherein it has been held the transfer pricing adjustment, if any, has to be made vis-à-vis associated enterprises transaction and not on entity level. Accordingly, Pune Bench of the Tribunal directed AO/TPO to re- compute the ALP of international transactions of the assessee with its associated enterprises on the basis of the transactions with as…

Commvault Systems (India) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

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

ITA 2280/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N.Prasad, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S.Commvault Systems Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of (India) Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, 5Th Floor, Plot No.39, Circle-1(2), B-Block, 7Th Floor, I.T. Towers Phase-Ii, Block-A Ananth Info Park A.C.Guards, Masab Tank Hitech City, Madhapur, Hyderabad – 500 004 Hyderabad Pan/Gir No.Aaccc3708L (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…ra in view of the decision of the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in 19 M/s.Commvault Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd., the case of CIT vs. Phoenix Mecano (India) Pvt. Ltd., reported in 414 ITR 704 and in the case of CIT vs. Thyssen Krupp Industries Pvt. Ltd., reported in 381 ITR 413 (Bom) and CIT vs. Tara Jewels Export P. Ltd., reported in 381 ITR 404 (Bom). 6.7. In any case we find that the issue in dispute is squarely covered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee‟s own case for the A.Y.2011-12 in ITA No.343/Hyd/2016 dated 11/04/2018 wherein this Tribunal after examining the nature and terms of the distribu…