How many judgments cite Global Solutions Ltd. v. ACIT?

13 judgments on BharatTax cite Global Solutions Ltd. v. ACIT (112 TTJ 1002), spanning 2015 to 2022.

Global Solutions Ltd. v. ACIT

112 TTJ 1002Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2007#8638 most cited

What is Global Solutions Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

Deduction under section 10AA is allowable even if the assessee itself makes a transfer pricing adjustment, provided the income is declared based on that adjustment. The deduction is denied only if the TPO makes an adjustment that results in an enhancement of income.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,421 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Global Solutions Ltd. v. ACIT · ITAT · 2007 · section 10AA · transfer pricing adjustment · arm's length price · voluntary adjustment · deduction

Also reported as

24 SOT 3

Judgments citing Global Solutions Ltd. v. ACIT

M/S. Course5 Intelligence Private Limited (Formerly Cross Tab Marketing Services Private Limited), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 15/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Course5 Intelligence Pvt. Ltd., (Formerly Cross Tab Marketing Services The Deputy Pvt. Ltd.) Commissioner Of No. 422, 80 Feet Income Tax, Road, Circle – 2(1)(1), 6Th Block, Vs. Bangalore. Koramangala, Bangalore – 560 095. Pan: Aabcc6525A Appellant Respondent : Shri Padam Chand Khincha, Assessee By Ca : Shri Srinivas Rao Bandaru, Revenue By Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing : 14-07-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 14/10/2019 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-2, Bangalore For A.Y. 2013-14 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Assessing Officer Had Erred In Passing The Order In The Manner Passed By Him & The Learned Cit (A) Has Erred In Partially Confirming The Same. The Orders Passed Being Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed.

For Respondent: Shri Padam Chand Khincha

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 234B

…f deduction under section 10AA is only when the TPO makes the adjustment. The deduction is not to be denied when the assessee is himself making the adjustment. This view is fortified by the jurisdictional Tribunal in iGate Global Solutions Ltd vs. ACIT [2008] 24 SOT 3 (URO) (Bang.) [Page 163-171 of the paperbook] wherein it was held that the assessee itself computed arm's length price and disclosed income on the Page 8 of 26 basis of said price, it could not be regarded as a case where there was enhancement of income due to determination of arm's length price by the TPO. In such circumstances, the appellant is en…

M/S. Eygbs (India ) LLP (Earlier Known As Eygbs (India) Private Limited), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 2342/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Nov 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.2342/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, A.RFor Respondent: Smr. R. Premi, D.R

Section 10ASection 234B

…DRP also proceeded on the ground that the assessee did not determine the voluntary T.P adjustment in its Transfer Pricing Study. Accordingly, the Ld DRP held that the decision rendered by the co-ordinate bench in the case of I-Gate Global Solutions Ltd (2007)(112 TTJ 1002) is distinguishable. Accordingly the Ld DRP directed the AO to disallow the deduction claimed u/s 10AA in respect of Voluntary Transfer pricing adjustment. 18. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. The Ld A.R submitted that the Ld DRP was factually not correct in observing that the assessee did not furnish details of volunt…

M/S. Motorola Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5797/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble, [Assessment Year: 2008-09]

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

…IT v. Agilisys IT Services India (P) Ltd. [2018] 96 taxmann.com 374 (Bom. HC) iv) Austin Medical Solutions Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (TS-348-ITAT-2015, Bang. Tri.) v) iGate Global Solutions Ltd. (ITA No. 453/2008 Karn. HC 2014) vi) iGate Global Solutions Ltd. v ACIT (24 SOT 3, 2008, Bang. Tri.) The Ld. AR further submitted that delay in filing CA certificate is a mere procedural delay and the claim of the assessee (if otherwise allowable) may not be denied on this ground. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: i) ITO v Lepide Software Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 5455/Del/2012) 2013 (Del.Tri) ii) CIT vs. Mantec Consultant…

A.T. Kearney India Pvt. Ltd. (India Branch Office), Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed in

ITA 2623/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2010-11 A.T. Kearney India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, (India Branch Office), Circle 1(1), 6Th Floor, Tower D, New Delhi. Vs Global Business Park, Gurgaon-122002 (Pan: Aadca1436G) Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Ms Vrinda Tulsiyan, Adv. Department By: Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Ms Saweta Nakra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.06.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.06.2019

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…ITA 2623/Del/2015 Assessment year 2010-11 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I-2’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 A.T. Kearney India Pvt. Ltd. ACIT, (India Branch Office), Circle 1(1), 6th Floor, Tower D, New Delhi. vs Global Business Park, Gurgaon-122002 (PAN: AADCA1436G) Appellant Respondent Assessee by: Shri Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Ms Vrinda Tulsiyan, Adv. Department by: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT DR Ms Saweta Nakra, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 14.06.2019 Date of pronouncement : 21.06.2019 O R D E R PE…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. G S Engineering & Constructions India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

ITA 3980/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT DR

Section 10A

…er, on the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the assessment order passed by the AO. 7. Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2009-10 (supra), by relying upon the decision in iGate Global Solutions Ltd. vs. ACIT (2008) 24 SOT 3 (Bang.) rendered by ITAT Bench of Bangalore and confirmed by Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, decided the issue in controversy in favour of the assessee by returning following findings :- “6. We have heard both the parties and perused the relevant records, especially the impugned order. We find that the assessee has clarified that (i) it does not…

ACIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Tech Mahindra ( R &D Services) Ltd (Now Merged With Tech Mahindra Ltd), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2392/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

For Appellant: S/Shri Kartik Natarajan, H.P. MahajaniFor Respondent: S/Shri Jayant Kumar, Saurabh Deshpande

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 254(1)

…1.Before the FAA during the appellate proceedings,the assessee stated that there was no provision u/s.10A or u/s. 72 of the Act for adjustment of such losses.After considering the available material,the FAA referred to the case of IGate Global Solutions Ltd. (24 SOT 3)and held that the issue was fully covered by the order of Jurisdictional Bench of the Tribunal. Accordingly,he directed the AO to compute the deduction u/s. 10A of the Act in a like manner. 3.2.Before us,the DR stated that the matter could be decided on merits. AR supported the order of the ITAT. We find that in the case of IGate Global Solutions Lt…

ITO 10(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Lionbridge Technologies P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 290/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jainand Sh. N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: S/Sh. Ajay Vohra. Sr.Advocate & N.K. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Sh. N.K.Chand, CIT(DR) & Jitendra Yadav

…2008 (Bang.) v) “M/s. Hewiett Packard Global Soft Ltd.” IT No.333/Bang/208 (Bang) vi) “ACIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd.”, 172 Taxman 134 (Bang) vii) “ITO vs. Servio Global Solutions Ltd.”, 117 TTJ 380( Chennai) viii) “I-Gate Global Solutions Ltd. vs. ACIT”, 112 TTJ 1002 (Bang) ix) “Tata Elxsi Ltd.”, 115 TTJ 423 (Bang) –affirmed by Karnataka High Court in CIT vs. Tata Elxsi Ltd.: ITA No.70/2009, decided on 30.8.2011. 32 ITA No.668(Asr)/2014 x) “Nous Infosystems (P) Ltd. vs. ITO”, ITA No.1042/Bang/07 (Bang.) xi) “Mphasis Ltd. vs. ACIT”, ITA No.884/Bang/07 (Bang). xii) “Patni Telecom (P) Ltd. v. ITO”, 22 SOT 26 (H…

Lionbridge Technologies P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 8(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 7415/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jainand Sh. N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: S/Sh. Ajay Vohra. Sr.Advocate & N.K. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Sh. N.K.Chand, CIT(DR) & Jitendra Yadav

Lionbridge Technologies P. Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO RG 8(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 668/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jainand Sh. N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: S/Sh. Ajay Vohra. Sr.Advocate & N.K. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Sh. N.K.Chand, CIT(DR) & Jitendra Yadav

ITO 8(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Lionbridge Technologies P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1375/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jainand Sh. N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: S/Sh. Ajay Vohra. Sr.Advocate & N.K. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Sh. N.K.Chand, CIT(DR) & Jitendra Yadav

M/S. I Gate Global Solutions Ltd., Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1239/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.Sudhakar Rao, CIT(DR)

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C(2)

…0A has to be computed on a stand alone basis and the loss of the eligible units cannot be set off against profits of eligible units. In support of his contention, he placed reliance upon the following decisions: i. IGate Global Solutions Ltd. vs. ACIT (2008) 24 SOT 3(Bang.) and ii. CIT vs. Canara Workshops Pvt. Ltd. (161 ITR 320)(SC) IT(TP)A No.1239/Bang/2010 M/s.iGate Global Solutions Ltd., Page 22 of 24 7.2 The learned departmental representative, however, supported the orders of the authorities below. 8.2 On going through the material on record and after considering the rival contentions, we find that the…

M/S Austin Medical Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2008-09 is allowed

ITA 542/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jul 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P. Boazi.T. (T.P) A. No.542/Bang/2012 (Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S. Austin Medical Solutions Pvt. Ltd., No.23, Sydney Park, 2Nd Floor, Prestige Takt Kasturba Road Cross, Bangalore-560 001 …. Appellant. Pan Aaeca 5725B Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 11(1), Bangalore. ….. Respondent. Appellant By : Shri H.N. Khincha, C.A. Respondent By : Shri P. Dhivahar, Jcit (D.R) Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2015. Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2015. O R D E R Per Shri Jason P. Boaz, A.M. : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Iv, Bangalore Dt.24.2.2012 For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Facts Of The Case, Briefly, Are As Under :- 2.1 The Assessee, An Indian Company Engaged In The Business Of Export Of Software & Ites, Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2008-09 On 18.12.2008 Declaring Nil Income. In The Return Of Income, The Income From Business Was Computed At Rs.63,02,287; Which Included An Amount Of Rs.28,61,352 By Way Of A Suo Moto Transfer Pricing Adjustment To The Arm’S Length

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Khincha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, JCIT (D.R)

Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 92Section 92CSection 92C(4)

…eturn of income for Assessment Year 2008-09. The learned Authorised Representative was heard in support of the grounds raised and relied for the assessee's claim on the decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case of iGate Global Solutions Ltd. V ACIT (2008) 24 SOT 3 (Bang) which dealt with a similar issue. The learned Authorised Representative also placed on record a copy of the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the same case in ITA No.453/2008 dt.17.6.2014 in which the Hon'ble Court dismissed Revenue’s appeal against the above order of the co-ordinate bench. 5 IT(T.P)A No.542/Bang/2012 Austin Me…

Nds Limited - India Branch Office, Bangalore vs. DDIT International Taxation, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2006-07 is partly allowed

ITA 1515/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Mar 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazi.T(T.P) A. No.1515/Bang/2010 (Assessment Year : 2006-07) Nds Limited – India Branch Office, Vs. Dy. Director Of Income Tax, No.9, Ashford Park View, (International Taxation), 80 Ft Road, Koramangala Iii Block, Circle 1 (1), Bangalore. Bangalore-560 034 Pan Aabcn 2524L Appellant Respondent.

For Appellant: Smt. Shreya Loyalka, C.AFor Respondent: Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, CIT (D.R)

Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…The Learned AO and the Honorable DRP have erred in law and on facts in disregarding the decisions of the Jurisdictional Tribunal, binding on the Learned AO, in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd Vs DCIT (ITA No 315/Bang/2006) and i Gate Global Solutions Ltd Vs ACIT (112 TTJ 1002) which had held that whatever is reduced from the export turnover, needs to be reduced from the total turnover as well. 3. Transfer Pricing Transfer Pricing – lack of jurisdiction / Against principles of natural justice 3.1 The Learned AO has erred in passing the order under section 143(3) read with section 144C of the Act, following the directi…