CN O IT Services (India) P. Ltd. v. DCIT

43 Taxmann.com 231Reported decision2014#14200 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2018.

Judgments citing CN O IT Services (India) P. Ltd. v. DCIT

Pr Commissioner of Income vs. M/S Sunquest

ITA/4/2016HC Karnataka02 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260Section 260A

…rnover. Flextronics Software Systems Ltd., was also held to be functionally not comparable with a software development service provider such as the Assessee by the ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the case of CN O IT Services (India) P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 231 (Hyderabad-Trib). Infosys Ltd., has also been held to be dissimilar Date of Judgment 02-07-2018 I.T.A.No.4/2016 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. Vs. M/s. Sunquest Information Systems (India) Private Limited. 11/16 to a captive service providing software development company by the ITAT Bangalore Bench in the…

Pr. Commissioner vs. M/S Sunquest

ITA/5/2016HC Karnataka02 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260Section 260A

…rnover. Flextronics Software Systems Ltd., was also held to be functionally not comparable with a software development service provider such as the Assessee by the ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the case of CN O IT Services (India) P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 231 (Hyderabad-Trib). Infosys Ltd., has also been held to be dissimilar Date of Judgment 02-07-2018 I.T.A.No.5/2016 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. Vs. M/s. Sunquest Information Systems (India) Private Limited. 11/16 to a captive service providing software development company by the ITAT Bangalore Bench in the…

Smt. Kamakshi Devi Avaru vs. The Wealth Tax Officer

WTA/4/2016HC Karnataka03 Apr 2017

Bench: JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA,H.G.RAMESH

Section 260Section 260A

ITO 10(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Keystone Solution P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4508/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri M. MuzaliFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand

Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.4508/Mum./2011 (Assessment Year : 2005–06) Income Tax Officer Ward–10(3)(4) Aayakar Bhawan ……………. Appellant 101, M.K. Road, Mumbai v/s M/s. Keystone Solution P. Ltd. Block no.48, DEF Godrej Industries Complex Pirojshshnagar Gate no.4 ……………. Respondent Eastern Express Highway Vikhroli (E), Mumbai 400 079 PAN – AACCS7667Q Revenue by : Shri N.K. Chand Assessee by : Shri M. Muzali Date of Hearing – 21.07.2016 Date of Order – 19.10.2016 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M.…

ITO vs. M/S Cdc Software India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

ITA 1645/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Oct 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth G. S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Meera Srivastava, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 10Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.1645/Bang/2013 Assessment year : 2005-06 Income Tax Officer, M/s. CDC Software India Pvt. Ltd., 6th and 7th Floor, Canberra Ward-11(1), Bangalore. Vs. Block, UB City 24, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore-560025. PAN:AACCP7154M APPELLANT RESPONDENT C.O. No.113/B/2015 (In IT(TP)A No.1645/Bang/2013) Assessment year : 2005-06 M/s. CDC Software India Pvt. Income Tax Officer, Ltd., 6th and 7th Floor, Canberra Ward-11(1), Bangalore. Block, UB City 24, Vittal Vs. M…

DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. Globe Op Financial Services (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Department’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1610/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Soparkar a/wFor Respondent: Shri Sambit Mishra

Section 92C

…xcluded this company from the comparability analysis. In this context, we may refer to the following decisions:– i) DE Shaw India Software P. Ltd. v/s ACIT, 54 Taxmann.com 407; ii) ADP P. Ltd. v/s DCIT, 62 Taxmann.com 352; iii) CNO IT Services India P. Ltd., 43 Taxmann.com 231; and iv) Textron Global Technology Centre P. Ltd., 56 Taxmann.com 465. 59. Facts being identical, respectfully following the consistent view of the Co–ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, we uphold the decision of the 60. Before the Transfer Pricing Officer, the assessee objected to selection of the company as a comparable stating that it is en…

ITO, Bangalore vs. M/S Sunquest Information Systems P. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue and cross-objection by the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1302/BANG/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Jun 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.H.Sundar Rao, CIT-I (DR)

Section 92Section 92CSection 92E

…0 crores turnover. Flextronics Software Systems Ltd., was also held to be functionally not comparable with a software development service provider such as the Assessee by the ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the case of CN O IT Services (India) P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 231 (Hyderabad-Trib). Infosys Ltd., has also been held to be dissimilar to a captive service providing software development company by the ITAT Bangalore Bench in the case of DCIT Vs. Textron Global Technology Centre Pvt.Ltd. ITA No.29/Bang/2012 order dated 20.3.2015. IT(TP)A No.1302/Bang/2011 & CO No.92/Bang/2012 Page 30 of 32 34. The AO is…