E-Gain Communications (P.) Ltd. v. ITO

23 SOT 385Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#2571 most cited

What is E-Gain Communications (P.) Ltd. v. ITO authority for?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) allows for working capital adjustments to be made to comparable companies in transfer pricing analysis and upholds the use of a turnover filter for excluding non-comparable companies.

46

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

E-Gain Communications v. ITO · ITAT Pune 2008 · working capital adjustment · transfer pricing comparability · turnover filter · exclusion of comparable companies · Rule 10B(3) · Section 92CA · related party transaction · tested party

Also reported as

118 ITD 243

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 10BSection 144CSection 144C(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 37(1)Section 92CA

Issues it is cited on

section 144c(8)installation peconvertible foreign exchangemultiple year datasection 92c(2)captive service providerfar analysissection 14a disallowanceworking capital adjustmentrelated party transactionr&d expendituretested party

Judgments citing E-Gain Communications (P.) Ltd. v. ITO

ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1)(1), NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 3091/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.3091/िद"ी/2024(िन.व. 2020-21) Aristocrat Technologies India P. Ltd., 8Tgh To 10Th Floor, Tower-11A, Plot No. 20 & 21, Candor Techspace, It/Ites Sez Complex, Sector-135, Noida, Up 201304 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aahca-9200-G बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Circle-5(1)(1), Noida, Up Assessee By : Shri Atul Jain, Chartered Accountant Ms. Nishi Bhutani & Ms.Preeti Agnihotri, Chartered Accountants Department By : S/Shri S.K. Jhadav, Cit(Dr) & Rajesh Kumar Dhaneshta, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 04/04/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 03/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.05.2024 Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act,1961(Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). 2. The Facts Of The Case In Brief As Emanating From Records Are: The Assessee Is Engaged In Providing Design & Development Services To Its Associated Enterprises (Ae’S). The Assessee Is Also Rendering Global It Services To Its Ae’S

For Appellant: Shri Atul Jain, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: S/Shri S.K. Jhadav, CIT(DR) & Rajesh Kumar Dhaneshta, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 270A

…has been appreciated by the Hon'ble Tribunals : • Mercer Consulting (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2014] 47 taxmann.com 84/150 ITD 1 (Delhi) • Mentor Graphics (Noida) (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2007] 109 ITD 101 (Delhi) • E-Gain Communication (P) Ltd. v. ITO [2009] 118 ITD 243 (Pune) • Sony India (P.) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2012] 21 taxmann.com 224/51 SOT 96 (URO) (Delhi) • Capgemini India (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2013] 33 taxmann.com 5/[2014] 147 ITD 330 (Mum.) 8. In view of the above, a working Capital adjustment appropriately takes into account the outstanding receivable. Therefore, the assessee has undertaken a working…

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)

…y, we do not find any infirmity in the finding of CIT(A) while he excluded this company on the turnover criteria following the decision of this tribunal in: Sony India (P) Ltd. V. DY. CIT [2008] 114 ITD 448 (Delhi) E-gain communication (P). Ltd. V. ITO [2008] 23 SOT 385 (Pune). Deloitte Consulting India (P) Ltd. V. Dy. CIT [2013] 144 ITD 451/36 taxman.com 68 (Hyd.) Genisys Integrating System (India) (P). Ltd. V. Dy. CIT [2012] 53 SOT 159/20 taxman.com 715 (Bang.)” 5.1. Considering the undisputed facts on record, factual finding given by the ld. CIT(A) and judicial precedents in favour of the assessee as noted ab…

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)

…y, we do not find any infirmity in the finding of CIT(A) while he excluded this company on the turnover criteria following the decision of this tribunal in: Sony India (P) Ltd. V. DY. CIT [2008] 114 ITD 448 (Delhi) E-gain communication (P). Ltd. V. ITO [2008] 23 SOT 385 (Pune). Deloitte Consulting India (P) Ltd. V. Dy. CIT [2013] 144 ITD 451/36 taxman.com 68 (Hyd.) Genisys Integrating System (India) (P). Ltd. V. Dy. CIT [2012] 53 SOT 159/20 taxman.com 715 (Bang.)” 5.1. Considering the undisputed facts on record, factual finding given by the ld. CIT(A) and judicial precedents in favour of the assessee as noted ab…

SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1076/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Schneider Electric India Vs Acit Pvt.Ltd., 9Th Floor, Tower C Circle-22(2) Building No.10, Dlf Cyber Room No. 226 City, Phase-Ii, Gurgaon C.R. Building Hartyana-122002 New Delhi-110002 Pan-Aabcs1642G Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rohit Tiwari, Adv. & Tanya, Adv. Respondent By Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 17.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09.04.2025

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C(2)Section 92D

…7; (ii) Rule 10B(3) of the Income Tax Rules, 1961; (iii) Recent rulings in the case of Demag Cranes & Components (India) Pvt. Limited ITA [No.120/PN/2011], Mentor Graphics (Noida) Pvt. Ltd. [112 TTJ 408] ('Mentor Ruling), E-Gain Communication (P) Ltd. vs ITO (118 ITD 243) in ITA NO 1685/PN/2007 ('E-Gain Ruling). TNT India Lad Vs ACIT (ITA No.1442 (BNG)/08), Vedaris Technology (P) Ltd. (ITA No. 4372(Del)/2009), Mercer Consulting (India) Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.966/Del/2014). Accordingly, based on the aforesaid submission and judicial precedents, the assessee contends that it be granted the benefit of working capital adj…

SCHOTT GLASS INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 8(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, ITA 7356/Mum/2014 of the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and ITA No

ITA 7356/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Amarjit Singhschott Glass India Private Vs. Income Tax Officer 8(3)-1 Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Room No. 201, Aayakar 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai – 400020 Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Schott Glass India Private Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Income Tax 8(3) 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 204, Aayakar Andheri Kurla Road, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400020 Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ketan Ved Respondent By : Mahesh Jiwade Date Of Hearing 12.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.01.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): Both These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Agasint The Different Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-15, Mumbai. Since Both These Appeals

For Appellant: Ketan VedFor Respondent: Mahesh Jiwade
Section 143(2)Section 144C(1)Section 92C

…eliminate difference between assessee and comparables. Placing reliance upon decision of this Tribunal as well as Pune Tribunal in Honeywell Technology solutions Lab Pvt.Ltd in ITA No. 1344/Bang/2011 and E-Gain Communications Pvt.Ltd vs ITO reported in (2008) 23 SOT 385, she submitted that Ld.CIT (A) rightly directed Ld.TPO to exclude depreciation from operating costs of assessee as well as comparables. Ld.CIT DR placed reliance upon orders passed by Ld.AO/TPO. 12. We have perused submissions advanced by both sides in the light of the records placed before us. It has been submitted by the Ld.AR that for assessmen…

SCHOTT GLASS INDIA PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. D.C.I.T. CIRCLE 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, ITA 7356/Mum/2014 of the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and ITA No

ITA 2594/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Amarjit Singhschott Glass India Private Vs. Income Tax Officer 8(3)-1 Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Room No. 201, Aayakar 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai – 400020 Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Schott Glass India Private Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Income Tax 8(3) 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 204, Aayakar Andheri Kurla Road, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400020 Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ketan Ved Respondent By : Mahesh Jiwade Date Of Hearing 12.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.01.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): Both These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Agasint The Different Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-15, Mumbai. Since Both These Appeals

For Appellant: Ketan VedFor Respondent: Mahesh Jiwade
Section 143(2)Section 144C(1)Section 92C

…eliminate difference between assessee and comparables. Placing reliance upon decision of this Tribunal as well as Pune Tribunal in Honeywell Technology solutions Lab Pvt.Ltd in ITA No. 1344/Bang/2011 and E-Gain Communications Pvt.Ltd vs ITO reported in (2008) 23 SOT 385, she submitted that Ld.CIT (A) rightly directed Ld.TPO to exclude depreciation from operating costs of assessee as well as comparables. Ld.CIT DR placed reliance upon orders passed by Ld.AO/TPO. 12. We have perused submissions advanced by both sides in the light of the records placed before us. It has been submitted by the Ld.AR that for assessmen…

DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI vs. ZENSAR TECHNOLOGIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 8389/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.8389/मुं/2010 (िन.व. 2005-06) Dcit-2(3), Room No.555, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Zensar Technologies Ltd., Magnet House, 2Nd Floor, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacz 0742 K ....."ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Cit - Dr "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 22/08/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 13/11/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar, CIT - DRFor Respondent: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate
Section 10ASection 244ASection 92C

…finding that depreciation in the books of the assessee are at a higher rate than the rate prescribed under the Companies Act, 1956. We find that depreciation adjustment is not an alien concept. The Tribunal in the case of Egan Communication Pvt. Ltd. v s. ITO 23 SOT 385 22 (Pune) allowed adjustment for depreciation, where the rates of depreciation adopted by the tested party and the comparable companies were different. Subsequently, deprecation has been allowed by the Tribunal in various decisions some of them are cited herein under: (i) Outsource Partner International Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, 87 taxmann.com 332 (Ba…

M/S. COMPUTER SCIENCE CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE 2(1) , INDORE

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application is also disposed of

ITA 319/IND/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(8)

…n the decision of Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACI Worldwide Solutions Private Limited (TS-176- ITAT-2015(Bang)-TP). The Ld. AR also relied upon the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Egain Communication (P) Limited (2009) 118 ITD 243 (Pune). Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that it is an established jurisprudence that the margins of the comparable companies should be adjusted on account of difference in depreciation between the assessee and the comparable companies. 10. The Ld. DR submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as the Transfer Pricing Officer has followed the well se…

M/S. COMPUTER SCIENCE CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. THE ACIT-CIRCLE 2(1), INDORE

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application is also disposed of

ITA 292/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(8)

…n the decision of Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACI Worldwide Solutions Private Limited (TS-176- ITAT-2015(Bang)-TP). The Ld. AR also relied upon the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Egain Communication (P) Limited (2009) 118 ITD 243 (Pune). Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that it is an established jurisprudence that the margins of the comparable companies should be adjusted on account of difference in depreciation between the assessee and the comparable companies. 10. The Ld. DR submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as the Transfer Pricing Officer has followed the well se…

M/S. COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(1), INDORE

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application is also disposed of

ITA 179/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(8)

…n the decision of Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACI Worldwide Solutions Private Limited (TS-176- ITAT-2015(Bang)-TP). The Ld. AR also relied upon the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Egain Communication (P) Limited (2009) 118 ITD 243 (Pune). Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that it is an established jurisprudence that the margins of the comparable companies should be adjusted on account of difference in depreciation between the assessee and the comparable companies. 10. The Ld. DR submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as the Transfer Pricing Officer has followed the well se…

NOVELL SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands allowed and appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 319/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 280/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Micro Focus Software India Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Novell Software Development The Income Tax (India) Pvt. Ltd.), Officer, Bagmane Tech Park ‘D’ Ward – 4 (1)(3), Block, Bangalore. ‘Laurel’ 65/2, Vs. C V Raman Nagar, Byrasandra, Bangalore – 560 093. Pan: Aaacn6992K Appellant Respondent & It(Tp)A No. 319/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 (By Assessee) : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee By Advocate : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit Revenue By (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 03-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-04-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Cross Appeals Has Been Filed By Revenue As Well As Assessee Against Order Dated 29.12.2015 Passed By Ld.Ito Ward 5(1)(1)

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

…eliminate difference between assessee and comparables. Placing reliance upon decision of this Tribunal as well as Pune Tribunal in Honeywell Technology solutions Lab Pvt.Ltd in ITA No. 1344/Bang/2011 and E-Gain Communications Pvt.Ltd vs ITO reported in (2008) 23 SOT 385, she submitted that Ld.CIT (A) rightly directed Ld.TPO to exclude depreciation from operating costs of assessee as well as comparables. Ld.CIT DR placed reliance upon orders passed by Ld.AO/TPO. 12. We have perused submissions advanced by both sides in the light of the records placed before us. It has been submitted by the Ld.AR that for assessmen…

ITO WARD - 5(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S NOVELL SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands allowed and appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 280/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 280/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Micro Focus Software India Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Novell Software Development The Income Tax (India) Pvt. Ltd.), Officer, Bagmane Tech Park ‘D’ Ward – 4 (1)(3), Block, Bangalore. ‘Laurel’ 65/2, Vs. C V Raman Nagar, Byrasandra, Bangalore – 560 093. Pan: Aaacn6992K Appellant Respondent & It(Tp)A No. 319/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 (By Assessee) : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee By Advocate : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit Revenue By (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 03-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-04-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Cross Appeals Has Been Filed By Revenue As Well As Assessee Against Order Dated 29.12.2015 Passed By Ld.Ito Ward 5(1)(1)

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

…eliminate difference between assessee and comparables. Placing reliance upon decision of this Tribunal as well as Pune Tribunal in Honeywell Technology solutions Lab Pvt.Ltd in ITA No. 1344/Bang/2011 and E-Gain Communications Pvt.Ltd vs ITO reported in (2008) 23 SOT 385, she submitted that Ld.CIT (A) rightly directed Ld.TPO to exclude depreciation from operating costs of assessee as well as comparables. Ld.CIT DR placed reliance upon orders passed by Ld.AO/TPO. 12. We have perused submissions advanced by both sides in the light of the records placed before us. It has been submitted by the Ld.AR that for assessmen…

STMICROELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 6169/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C

…tioned that the ‘final set of comparables may need to eliminate differences by making adjustments for the following: (a) Working capital........” (para 27). Further, referring to the decision of Pune bench in the case of E-gain Communication P Ltd reported in 118 ITD 243, Ld Counsel mentioned that when TNMM is applied to a case, ‘the differences which are likely to materially affect the price, cost charged or paid in, or the profit in the open market are to be taken into consideration with the idea to make reasonable and accurate adjustment to eliminate the differences having material effect.’ If these difference…

NESS TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. 6(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 114/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Shamim Yahya, Am आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 114/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2014-15) Ness Technologies (India) Private Limited Unit No. 2, Building No. 5 & 6, Screne ……………. Appellant Properties Sez Mindspace, Thane Belapur Road, / अपीलाथी Airoli, Navi Mumbai स्थायी लेखा िं /Pan – Aaaca9649L V/S The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 6(1), Room No. 1905, 19Th Floor, …………….Respondent Air India Building, Nariman Point, / प्रत्यथााी Mumbai-400 021 अपीलाथाी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Nitesh Joshi, Ar प्रत्यथाी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri Rajesh Yadav, Dr ुिवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 19.09.2019 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19.09.2019 A A D O S A / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Yadav, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…g of software licenses: - In toto Software 5 | P a g e India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 1196/Hyd/2010) - ITO Vs. Colt Technology Services India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 609/Del/2011) - ACIT Vs. Sonata Software (ITA No. 3514/Mum/2010)-E-Gain Communications (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO, 23 SOT 385.” And Tribunal finally directed the AO to exclude the same vide Para 9 as under: “9. Similarly, the other cases, Bodhtree consulting Ltd, Four Soft Ltd, Infosys,., Sankhya Infotech Ltd., Thirdware Solutions Ltd, Tata Elexi (seg) etc, are also to be excluded as they are considered and analysed in various cases relied on about functionality and why…

ASST CIT 10(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. PANGEA3 LEGAL DATABASE P.LTD, MUMBAI

Appeal stands dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1923/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Singh-Ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…we do not find any infirmity in the finding of CIT (A) while he excluded this company on the turnover criteria following the decision of this tribunal in : Sony India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2008] 114 ITD 448 (Delhi) E-Gain Communication (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2008] 23 SOT 385 (Pune) Deloittee Consulting India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2013] 144 ITD 451/36 taxmann.com 68 (Hyd.) Genisys Integrating System (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2012] 53 SOT 159/20 taxmann.com 715 (Bang.) 6. The said findings of the Tribunal in respect of the said three Companies are on the basis of appreciation of evidence on record. We find no infirm…

PANGEA LEGAL DATABASE SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT , 10(3)(2), MUMBAI

Appeal stands dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1663/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Singh-Ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…we do not find any infirmity in the finding of CIT (A) while he excluded this company on the turnover criteria following the decision of this tribunal in : Sony India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2008] 114 ITD 448 (Delhi) E-Gain Communication (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2008] 23 SOT 385 (Pune) Deloittee Consulting India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2013] 144 ITD 451/36 taxmann.com 68 (Hyd.) Genisys Integrating System (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2012] 53 SOT 159/20 taxmann.com 715 (Bang.) 6. The said findings of the Tribunal in respect of the said three Companies are on the basis of appreciation of evidence on record. We find no infirm…

INTERNATIONAL SPECIALITY PRODUCTS (INDIA) P LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 15(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1279/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…we do not find any infirmity in the finding of CIT (A) while he excluded this company on the turnover criteria following the decision of this tribunal in : Sony India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2008] 114 ITD 448 (Delhi) E-Gain Communication (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2008] 23 SOT 385 (Pune) Deloittee Consulting India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2013] 144 ITD 451/36 taxmann.com 68 (Hyd.) Genisys Integrating System (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2012] 53 SOT 159/20 taxmann.com 715 (Bang.) 6. The said findings of the Tribunal in respect of the said three Companies are on the basis of appreciation of evidence on record. We find no infirm…

ACIT, GURGAON vs. M/S COMVERSE KENAN INDIA PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 2461/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sandeep Gosainassessment Year: 2005-06 The Ac.I.T Vs. M/S. Comverse Kenan India Circle - 1, Vs Pvt. Ltd. [Known As Csg Systems India Pvt Ltd] 2Nd Floor Gurgaon Dlf Cyber City, Phase – Ii Gurgaon Pan No.: Aabcc 9425 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.213/Del/2011 (A/O In Ita No.2461/Del/2011) Assessment Year : 2005-06 M/S. Comverse Kenan India Vs. The A.C.I.T Pvt. Ltd. [Known As Csg Circle - 1 Systems India Pvt Ltd] Gurgaon 2Nd Floor, Dlf Cyber City, Phase – Ii, Gurgaon Pan No.: Aabcc 9425 F

For Appellant: Shri G.C. SrivastavaFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Sr DR
Section 92C

…ed operating profit of 66.11% on operating cost and since the company is earning super normal profits, the same should be excluded. In support of this contention, reliance was placed on the following decisions of the Tribunal: a) Egain Communications Pvt Ltd 118 ITD 243 {Pune] b) SAP Labs Pvt. Ltd [Bangalore ITAT] c) Adobe Systems India Pvt Ltd [Delhi ITAT] 20. The assessee pleaded for benefit of working capital adjustment. It was also brought to the notice of the first appellate authority that the TPO has excluded L & T Infotech Ltd being one of the seven companies having related party transactions and yet in…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S JSL LTD.,, HISAR

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 4110/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr. DR
Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…: 106 ITD 175 (Del). - Skoda Auto India (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT : 122 TTJ 699 (Pune) - Schefenacker Motherson Ltd. vs. ITO (in ITA Nos. 4459 & 4469/Del/07), - Honeywell Automation India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No. 4/PN/08), - Egain Communication Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO : 118 ITD 243 (Pune) - Brintons Carpets Asia Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITA No. 1296/PN/10) - CRM Services India P. Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No. 4068/Del/2009) - The aforesaid decisions of the Tribunal have been affirmed by the Hon‘ble High Court in ITA No. 618/2012 and 619/2012 - Genisys Integrating Systems (India) Pvt Ltd vs DCIT (ITA No 1231/Bang/2010) - Radhashir Jewel…

JINDAL STAINLESS LTD.,HISAR vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 6337/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr. DR
Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…: 106 ITD 175 (Del). - Skoda Auto India (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT : 122 TTJ 699 (Pune) - Schefenacker Motherson Ltd. vs. ITO (in ITA Nos. 4459 & 4469/Del/07), - Honeywell Automation India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No. 4/PN/08), - Egain Communication Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO : 118 ITD 243 (Pune) - Brintons Carpets Asia Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITA No. 1296/PN/10) - CRM Services India P. Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No. 4068/Del/2009) - The aforesaid decisions of the Tribunal have been affirmed by the Hon‘ble High Court in ITA No. 618/2012 and 619/2012 - Genisys Integrating Systems (India) Pvt Ltd vs DCIT (ITA No 1231/Bang/2010) - Radhashir Jewel…

Showing 1–20 of 46 · Page 1 of 3