Microsoft India (R&D) Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

431 ITR 483High Court2021#20968 most cited

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

Issues it is cited on

section 28 section 154 section 10 previous year section 13 prescribed person section 143(3)india total income document interest

Judgments citing Microsoft India (R&D) Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 vs. STERIA INDIA PVT. LTD.

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/739/2025HC Delhi12 Dec 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

Section 92F

…similar issue of Infosys BPO  Open Solutions Software Services (P) Ltd. [2020] 315 CTR 497 (Del) [AY 2010- 11]  Cashedge India Pvt. Ltd. [ITA 279/2016; decided on 04.05.2016] (Del) [AY 2010-11]  Microsoft India (R&D) (P.) Ltd. [2021] 431 ITR 483 (Del) [AY 2010-11] 2.8 Wipro Technologies Ltd. 2.9 Persistent Systems Ltd.  Functional Profile: R&D, engineering services – No Segmental Data  Outsourcing of work  Open Solutions Software Services (P) Ltd. [2020] 315 CTR 497 (Del) [AY 2010- 11]  Cashedge India Pvt. Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:15.12.2025 15:…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 901/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Spl. Counsel for the Department

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 35Section 43B

…nding or investigation by Assessing officer. Remand in a casual manner as a shortcut is totally prohibited under the law.” It has been held similarly in the following decisions of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court:  Microsoft India (R&D) Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT: [2021] 431 ITR 483 (Del)  Vedanta Limited vs ACIT, order dated 19.09.2022 in ITA 63/2021 (Del.)  Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications vs CIT: 276 CTR 97 (Del.) In similar circumstances, other Hon’ble High Courts have in the following decisions disapproved the approach of the Tribunal in remanding the matter to the lower authorities when all evidences and documents…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1024/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Spl. Counsel for the Department

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 35Section 43B

SANT KIRPAL VIDYAK MISSION,LUDHIANA vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 561/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 May 2025AY 2017-18

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 250

…nI. Sony Pictures Networks India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITAT, Mumbai [2019] 411 ITR\n447 (Bombay HC).\nII. Coca cola India P. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Registrar representing ITAT [2014] 52\ntaxmann.com 399 (Bombay HC).\nIII. Microsoft India (R & D) Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT [2021] 431 ITR 483 (Delhi\nHon'ble High Court)\nIV. Blackstone FP Capital partners Mauritius V Limited [TS-984-ITAT-2022\n(Mum)]\n7. Per contra, the Ld. CIT DR had submitted that the assessee had failed to\nprovide the certificate of 12A before the Assessing Officer and further the reply of\nthe assessee was evasive and general in nature. It was submitted on accoun…