Telecordia Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACII

GBT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT,OSD, DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed as above

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

…e submission for exclusion of Infosys, the Ld. Counsel drew our attention to the relevant pages of the Paper Book (PB). He placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of GBT India Pvt. Ltd. Agnity India Technologies (I) Ltd. [2013] 262 CTR 291 and the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pentair Water India (P.) Ltd. [2016] 69 taxmann.com 180, where Infosys was excluded on similar grounds. 18. The Ld. CIT-DR justified inclusion of Infosys. He submitted that high turnover or brand value could not be the reason for exclusion of this comparable as the assessee had failed t…

BUCHER HYDRAULICS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.124/Del/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year 2012-13 Bucher Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.6, Sector-5, Imt Manesar, Gurgaon-122050. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaecs5991H Vs The Acit, Circle-5(1), Room No.G-15B, C.R.Building, …………. ""यथ" / Respondent New Delhi-110002. अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sh. M.Barnwal, Sr.Dr

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, "द"ल" "यायपीठ “आई-2”, नई "द"ल" म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I-2’, NEW DELHI सु"ी सुषमा चावला, उपा"य" एवं "ी "शांत मह"ष", लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, VP & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.124/Del/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year 2012-13 Bucher Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.6, Sector-5, IMT manesar, Gurgaon-122050. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant PAN-AAECS5991H vs The ACIT, Circle-5(1), Room No.G-15B, C.R.Building, …………. ""यथ" / Respondent New Delhi-110002. अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, C…

KAPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘I-1’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.S.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.-1481/Del/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Kaplan India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO Ward -14(2) 226, Tribhuvan Complex, New Delhi Ishwar Nagar, Friends Colony (west) New Delhi PAN : AAICS9919F Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Sh. Nageshwar Rao & Sandeep S. Karhail, Adv. Revenue by: Shri Sandeep Kr. Mishra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 29.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement 02.04.2019 ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, J.M.: This appeal is preferred by the assessee aga…

FREESCALE SEMICONDUCTOR INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…ld Transfer Pricing Officer and the ld Dispute Resolution Panel rejected the above contention. Before us, the ld AR submitted that this comparable should be excluded in view of the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Agnity India Technologies Ltd 262 CTR 291. He further stated that this comparable has been excluded in the case of the assessee for AY 2007-08 by the coordinate bench. 17. The ld DR relied upon the orders of the lower authorities. The ld DR could not point out that why we should not follow the decision in the assessee‟s own case without there being any change pointed out, 10 | P a g e…

M/S. FREESCALE SEMICONDUCTOR INDIA PVT. LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed accordingly

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishifreescale Semiconductor India Pvt Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 13, Abul Fazar Road, Circle-9(2), Room No. 405, Bengali Market, New Delhi Cr Building, Ip Estate Pan:Aaacz1978P New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ld Transfer Pricing Officer and the ld Dispute Resolution Panel rejected the above contention. Before us, the ld AR submitted that this comparable should be excluded in view of the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Agnity India Technologies Ltd 262 CTR 291. He further stated that this comparable has been excluded in the case of the assessee for AY 2007-08 by the coordinate bench. The ld DR relied upon the orders of the lower authorities. The ld DR could not point out that why we should not follow the decision in the assessee‟s own case Freescale Semiconductor India Pvt Ltd Vs. DCIT, ITA No. 2589 ,…

M/S. FREESCALE SEMICONDUCTOR INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ITA No. 2427/Del/2014 preferred by the appeal for Assessment Year 2008-09 is allowed to the extent of direction of exclusion to the ld TPO of (1) Kals Information Systems

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishifreescale Semiconductor India Pvt Ltd, Dcit, Vs. 13, Abul Fazar Road, Circle-9(2), Room No. 405, Bengali Market, New Delhi Cr Building, Ip Estate Pan:Aaacz1978P New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

…direct the ld Transfer Pricing Officer to exclude the above comparable. b. Infosys Ltd For the Infosys the ld AR stated that above comparable needs to be excluded because of the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Agnity India Technologies Ltd 262 CTR 291. The ld DR submitted that as directed in that decision about the impact of net profitability of the comparable which has not been demonstrated by ld AR, same cannot be excluded. The ld AR further stated that particular comparable has huge IPR and the profits are attributed to its brand which is valued at Rs. 31100 croes. He further stated that th…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SONY MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL AB, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: : Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri L.P. Sahu

…aised certain objections before the DRP against the inclusion of this company, and the ld. DRP accepted the objections of the assessee and following the decision of jurisdictional High 6006 & 6751/Del./2014 38 Court in the case of Agnity India Technologies, 262 CTR 291 (Del.) excluded this company from the final set of comparables, which has been agitated by the Revenue in its appeal. 42. The ld. DR relying on the reasons given by the ld. TPO, submitted that the ld. DRP was not justified in excluding this company, as this comparable satisfies all the filters of comparability test, as given by the ld. TPO. 43.…

M/S. SONY MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL AB (INDIA BRANCH OFFICE),NEW DELHI vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: : Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri L.P. Sahu

…aised certain objections before the DRP against the inclusion of this company, and the ld. DRP accepted the objections of the assessee and following the decision of jurisdictional High 6006 & 6751/Del./2014 38 Court in the case of Agnity India Technologies, 262 CTR 291 (Del.) excluded this company from the final set of comparables, which has been agitated by the Revenue in its appeal. 42. The ld. DR relying on the reasons given by the ld. TPO, submitted that the ld. DRP was not justified in excluding this company, as this comparable satisfies all the filters of comparability test, as given by the ld. TPO. 43.…