PCIT v. India Debt Management (P) Ltd. (106 Taxmann.com 55)

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Mahindra Homes Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 1212/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. S. Sriram a/w Mr. Samyak LohadeFor Respondent: Mr. Pankaj Kumar, CIT-DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA No. 1212/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 DCIT Room No. 126, 1st floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400020. Appellant Vs. Mahindra Homes Pvt. Ltd., 5th floor, Mahindra Towers, Dr. G.M. Bhosle Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400018. PAN NO. AAACW 9691 A Respondent Assessee by : Mr. S. Sriram a/w Mr. Samyak Lohade Revenue by : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement : : 01/07/2025 15/09/2025 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This app…

Natems Solar Power Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 16(1), Hyderabad

ITA 140/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Us:

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 234Section 234A

…borrowing rate will apply, whereas in case of credit allowed to a customer on sale of goods, the lending rate would apply.” 22. The assessees relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs. India Debt Management (P) Ltd. (2019) 106 Taxmann.com 55 (Bombay). The Hon’ble High Court, while upholding tribunal finding held as under: 30 Natems Solar Power Private Limited “3. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having perused the materials on record, we are broadly in agreement with the view of tribunal. The significant features of the assessee's case were that the assessee w…

M/S. Praxair India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in IT(TP)A No

ITA 199/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, Senior A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, D.R

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 92C

…IT(TP)A No.3336/Bang/2018 & IT(TP)A No.199/Bang/2021 M/s. Praxier India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.3336/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Praxier India Pvt. Ltd. Mercury 2B Block 6th Floor, Prestige Technology Park Outer Ring Road, Marathahalli Vs. ACIT Ci rcle-2 Bengaluru 566 103 Bengaluru PAN NO : AAACP9993J APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(TP)A No.199/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s. Praxier India Pvt. Ltd. Mercury 2B Block 6th Floor, Prestige Tech…

M/S Praxair India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in IT(TP)A No

ITA 3336/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, Senior A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, D.R

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 92C

…IT(TP)A No.3336/Bang/2018 & IT(TP)A No.199/Bang/2021 M/s. Praxier India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.3336/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Praxier India Pvt. Ltd. Mercury 2B Block 6th Floor, Prestige Technology Park Outer Ring Road, Marathahalli Vs. ACIT Ci rcle-2 Bengaluru 566 103 Bengaluru PAN NO : AAACP9993J APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(TP)A No.199/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s. Praxier India Pvt. Ltd. Mercury 2B Block 6th Floor, Prestige Tech…

M/S on Mobile Global Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes and appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 535/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 523/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/s. OnMobile Global Ltd., Tower # 1, 94/1C & The Deputy 94/2, Veerasandra Commissioner of Village, Income Tax, Attibele Hobli, Circle – 5(1)(2), Anekal Taluk, Bangalore. Vs. Electronic City Phase-I, Bangalore – 560100. PAN: AAACO3900E APPELLANT RESPONDENT & IT(TP)A No. 535/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 (By Assessee) : Shri T. Surya Narayana, Assessee by Advocate : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Revenue by CIT DR Date…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. Onmobile Global Ltd., Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes and appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 523/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 523/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/s. OnMobile Global Ltd., Tower # 1, 94/1C & The Deputy 94/2, Veerasandra Commissioner of Village, Income Tax, Attibele Hobli, Circle – 5(1)(2), Anekal Taluk, Bangalore. Vs. Electronic City Phase-I, Bangalore – 560100. PAN: AAACO3900E APPELLANT RESPONDENT & IT(TP)A No. 535/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 (By Assessee) : Shri T. Surya Narayana, Assessee by Advocate : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Revenue by CIT DR Date…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1(1), Pune vs. M/S. Bellflower Properties Pvt.Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2111/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviिनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/S. Kolte Patil Developers Ltd. Pune (Erstwhile Bellflower Properties Pvt. Ltd. Merged With Kolte Patil Developers Ltd.,) Second Floor, City Point, Dhole Patil Road, Pune – 411 001 Pan : Aadcb1007A Appellant Respondent िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Kolte Patil Developers Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), (Erstwhile Bellflower Properties Pvt. Pune Ltd. Merged With Kolte Patil Developers Ltd.,) Second Floor, City Point, Dhole Patil Road, Pune – 411 001 Pan : Aadcb1007A Appellant Respondent

…ITR 0516 (Bom) has held that where loans are advanced to AEs, the ALP should be determined on the basis of rate of interest being charged in country where loan is received. Similar view has been reiterated in Pr. CIT VS. India Debt Management P. Ltd. (2019) 417 ITR 103 (Bom). In the light of these judgments, the rate of interest to be taken into consideration for our purpose is the rate payable in India since the assessee is recipient of the loan in the form of debentures. In principle, the ld. CIT(A) is correct in Kolte Patil Developers Ltd., taking cognizance of the rate of interest payable on borrowings i…

M/S. Kolte Patil Developers Ltd., (Erstwhile:M/S. Bellflower Properties Private Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1980/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviिनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/S. Kolte Patil Developers Ltd. Pune (Erstwhile Bellflower Properties Pvt. Ltd. Merged With Kolte Patil Developers Ltd.,) Second Floor, City Point, Dhole Patil Road, Pune – 411 001 Pan : Aadcb1007A Appellant Respondent िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Kolte Patil Developers Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), (Erstwhile Bellflower Properties Pvt. Pune Ltd. Merged With Kolte Patil Developers Ltd.,) Second Floor, City Point, Dhole Patil Road, Pune – 411 001 Pan : Aadcb1007A Appellant Respondent

…ITR 0516 (Bom) has held that where loans are advanced to AEs, the ALP should be determined on the basis of rate of interest being charged in country where loan is received. Similar view has been reiterated in Pr. CIT VS. India Debt Management P. Ltd. (2019) 417 ITR 103 (Bom). In the light of these judgments, the rate of interest to be taken into consideration for our purpose is the rate payable in India since the assessee is recipient of the loan in the form of debentures. In principle, the ld. CIT(A) is correct in Kolte Patil Developers Ltd., taking cognizance of the rate of interest payable on borrowings i…

PCIT v. India Debt Management (P) Ltd.

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing PCIT v. India Debt Management (P) Ltd.