Vodafone India Services (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

146 ITD 78Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2014#11170 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Also reported as

36 Taxmann.com 127

Sections most often in play

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 92CA(3)

Judgments citing Vodafone India Services (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

TECH MAHINDRA BUISNESS SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 13(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 521/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “H” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri Vikas Awasthy, Judicial Member & Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 521/Mum/2015 (A.Y. 2010-11) C.O. No. 54/Mum/2015 [in I.T.A. No. 1126/Mum/2015 (A.Y. 2010-11)] Vs. ACIT, Circle- Tech Mahindra Business Services Ltd. 13(3)(2) (formerly known as Hutchison Aayakar Bhavan Global Services Ltd.) M.K. Road Spectrum Towers Mumbai-400 020. Mindspace, Chincholi Bunder link Road Malad West Mumbai-400064. PAN: AABCH8136L (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 1126/Mum/2015 (A.Y. 2010-11) Vs. Tech Mahindra Business DCIT, Circle-13(3)(2)…

DCIT 13(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. TECH MAHINDRA BUSINESS SERVICES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1126/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “H” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri Vikas Awasthy, Judicial Member & Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 521/Mum/2015 (A.Y. 2010-11) C.O. No. 54/Mum/2015 [in I.T.A. No. 1126/Mum/2015 (A.Y. 2010-11)] Vs. ACIT, Circle- Tech Mahindra Business Services Ltd. 13(3)(2) (formerly known as Hutchison Aayakar Bhavan Global Services Ltd.) M.K. Road Spectrum Towers Mumbai-400 020. Mindspace, Chincholi Bunder link Road Malad West Mumbai-400064. PAN: AABCH8136L (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 1126/Mum/2015 (A.Y. 2010-11) Vs. Tech Mahindra Business DCIT, Circle-13(3)(2)…

MPS TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1385/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1385/Chny/2014 (िनधा4रण वष4 / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Mps Technologies Ltd. Acit (Now Merged With Mps Ltd.) Company Circle-Iv(3), बनाम/ Rr Tower-4, 4Th Floor Super A, Chennai. Vs. 16&17, Tvk Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecm-0205-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1120/Chny/2014 (िनधा4रण वष4 / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit M/S. Mps Technologies Ltd. Company Circle-Iv(3), (Now Merged With Mps Ltd.) बनाम/ Rr Tower -4, 4Th Floor Super A, Chennai. Vs. 16&17, Tvk Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecm-0205-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaram (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Palani Kumar- Ld. CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…be excluded from the set of comparables, on the ground that both the comparables had events by way of mergers and acquisitions. 3.2. The learned DRP failed to appreciate that the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Vodafone India Services (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (146 ITD 78), relying upon a co- ordinate Bench decision of the same Tribunal in the case of Willis Processing Services (I)(P) Ltd. v. DCIT (57 SOT 339), has held that 'a comparable cannot be excluded merely on ground of merger / amalgamation, unless the resultant company is functionally different'. 3.3. In the absence of any material to demonstrate that the…

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MPS TECHNOLGOIES LTD., CHENNAI

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

ITA 1120/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1385/Chny/2014 (िनधा4रण वष4 / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Mps Technologies Ltd. Acit (Now Merged With Mps Ltd.) Company Circle-Iv(3), बनाम/ Rr Tower-4, 4Th Floor Super A, Chennai. Vs. 16&17, Tvk Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecm-0205-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1120/Chny/2014 (िनधा4रण वष4 / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit M/S. Mps Technologies Ltd. Company Circle-Iv(3), (Now Merged With Mps Ltd.) बनाम/ Rr Tower -4, 4Th Floor Super A, Chennai. Vs. 16&17, Tvk Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecm-0205-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaram (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Palani Kumar- Ld. CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…be excluded from the set of comparables, on the ground that both the comparables had events by way of mergers and acquisitions. 3.2. The learned DRP failed to appreciate that the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Vodafone India Services (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (146 ITD 78), relying upon a co- ordinate Bench decision of the same Tribunal in the case of Willis Processing Services (I)(P) Ltd. v. DCIT (57 SOT 339), has held that 'a comparable cannot be excluded merely on ground of merger / amalgamation, unless the resultant company is functionally different'. 3.3. In the absence of any material to demonstrate that the…

JCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. STERIA INDIA PVT. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed in part for statistical purpose

ITA 512/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT/DRFor Respondent: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Advocate &
Section 143(3)Section 144C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I-2’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 512 & 511/Del/2016 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 JCIT, Spcl. Range-8, vs. Steria India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. Sea View Special Eclonomic Zone, Building-4, Plot 20-21, Sector 135, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida. PAN : AAACX0385L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT/DR Respondent by: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Advocate & Sh. RamitKatyal, Advocate Date of hearing: 19/10/2020 Date of order : 17/11/2020 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY,…

JCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. STERIA INDIA PVT. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed in part for statistical purpose

ITA 511/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT/DRFor Respondent: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Advocate &
Section 143(3)Section 144C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I-2’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 512 & 511/Del/2016 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 JCIT, Spcl. Range-8, vs. Steria India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. Sea View Special Eclonomic Zone, Building-4, Plot 20-21, Sector 135, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida. PAN : AAACX0385L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT/DR Respondent by: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Advocate & Sh. RamitKatyal, Advocate Date of hearing: 19/10/2020 Date of order : 17/11/2020 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY,…

EFFECTIVE TELESERVICES PVT. LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3077/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & M/S. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3077/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-11) बनाम/ Effective Teleservices Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Gandhinagar Circle, 1St Floor, It Tower Iv, Vs. Gandhinagar. Infocity, Nr. Infroda Circle, Gandhinagar – 382009 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaa Ce9 318 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Dhinal Shah, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By: Apporva Bharadwaj, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 25/02/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 13/05/2019 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed - Am:

For Appellant: Dhinal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Apporva Bharadwaj, Sr. DR
Section 234BSection 271Section 27U

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘D’ अहमदाबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And M/s. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3077/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-11) बनाम/ Effective Teleservices Pvt. Ltd. DCIT, Gandhinagar Circle, 1st Floor, IT Tower IV, Vs. Gandhinagar. Infocity, Nr. Infroda Circle, Gandhinagar – 382009 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAA CE9 318 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant by : Dhinal Shah, AR ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent by: Apporva Bh…

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2754/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. Transcend India Pvt. Ltd., Circle-25(2), B-4, Sagar Tower, Janak Puri, New Delhi. District Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aagcs9759K Co No.446/Del/2015 (Ita No.2754/Del/2015) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Transcend India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 1/1, Arakere, Circle-25(2), Bannerghatta Road, New Delhi. Bangalore. Pan: Aagcs9759K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vishal Kalra & Shri S.S. Tomar, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Sarabjeet Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.12.2018 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29Th January, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-44, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2007-08. The Assessee Co No.446/Del/2015 Has Filed A Co Against The Appeal Filed By The Revenue. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra &For Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 92C

…2015 (Delhi- Trib.) for A.Y. 2007-08 at para 40 of the order. (ii) Samsung Heavy Industries India Private Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA No.576/Del/2015 (Delhi- Trib.) for A.Y. 2010-11 at paras 29 to 31 of the order. (iii) Vodafone India Services (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2014) 146 ITD 78 (Mumbai) for A.Y.2007-08 at para 21.1 of the order. (iv) DCIT vs. Monster.Com India Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 56 ITR(T) 1 (Hyderabad-trib.) for A.Y. 2007-08 at para 36 & 36.1 of the order. (v) Orange Business Services India Solutions Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA No. 869/Del/2016 (Delhi-Trib.) for A.Y. 2011-12 at paras 4.1 & 4.3 of the order. (vi) NTT Data Globa…

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. EXL SERVICE.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 615/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92D

…ny may be excluded as a comparable. The reliance was placed on the decision of the ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of m/s Wills Processing Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT reported at 30 ITR (Trib.) 39 (Mum.) and Vodaphone India Services Pvt. Ltd. reported at 146 ITD 78 (Mum.). It was further submitted that the assessee itself did not take merger and acquisition as filter, now selectively applying this filter, the whole search process becomes vitiated and biased in favour of the assessee because the other comparables might have been having the intangible. 12. We have considered the submissions of both the partie…

EXL SERVICE.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 302/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92D

…ny may be excluded as a comparable. The reliance was placed on the decision of the ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of m/s Wills Processing Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT reported at 30 ITR (Trib.) 39 (Mum.) and Vodaphone India Services Pvt. Ltd. reported at 146 ITD 78 (Mum.). It was further submitted that the assessee itself did not take merger and acquisition as filter, now selectively applying this filter, the whole search process becomes vitiated and biased in favour of the assessee because the other comparables might have been having the intangible. 12. We have considered the submissions of both the partie…