“associated enterprise”

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Enzen Global Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year

w.e.f. 1.4.2018 by virtue of the provisions of Sec.94B of the Act, but those provisions are applicable only in the case of transactions with Associated Enterprise which is not a tax resident of India. It is a common practice among multinational companies globally to lessen their tax ITA Nos.2332, 2550/Bang/2019 ... Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”), as an anti-tax avoidance provision to restrict deduction of interest paid to non-resident associated enterprises (AEs). As already stated, the said provisions are applicable only when interest is paid to non-resident associated enterprises and such a feature is absent

M/S. Enzen Global Solutions Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2(1)(4), Banglaoore

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year

w.e.f. 1.4.2018 by virtue of the provisions of Sec.94B of the Act, but those provisions are applicable only in the case of transactions with Associated Enterprise which is not a tax resident of India. It is a common practice among multinational companies globally to lessen their tax ITA Nos.2332, 2550/Bang/2019 ... Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”), as an anti-tax avoidance provision to restrict deduction of interest paid to non-resident associated enterprises (AEs). As already stated, the said provisions are applicable only when interest is paid to non-resident associated enterprises and such a feature is absent

M/S. Te Connectivity Services India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No.191/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Te Connectivity Services India Private Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Limited, Delhi. 59/2, 1St Floor, Gurudas Heritage, Block-B, 100 Feet Ring Road, Banashankari 2Nd Stage, Bengaluru – 560 070. Pan: Aafct 3474 R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Sriram Seshadri, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.09.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan:

No.191/Bang/2022 Page 2 of 30 Arm’s Length Price (ALP) in respect of an international transaction entered into by the assessee with its Associated Enterprise (AE). The assessee has also raised additional ground No.14 which is nothing but a facet of the argument of the assessee in connection with ... suffered any loss. It is undisputed that the assessee has deducted TDS on the entire interest expenditure. The assessee while benchmarking interest payment to Associated Enterprise for the purpose of Sec.92 of the Act has benchmarked the entire interest amount of Rs.6.09 Crores. Thus, looked at from any perspective

M/S. Harman Connected Services Corporation India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s. 143(2) was duly served on the assessee. Since the assessee had international transactions with its Associated Enterprises (AE), a reference was made to the Transfer Pricing Officer [TPO]. The TPO concluded that the assessment u/s. 92CA by making an adjustment ... Tribunal did not err in holding that the loss suffered by the assessee by allowing excess period of credit to the associated enterprises without charging an interest during such credit period would not amount to international transaction whereas section 92B(1) of the Income- tax Act, 1961 refers

Walvoil Fluid Power India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No.339/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Walvoil Fluid Power India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner No.19, 2Nd Cross, 2Nd Main, Of Income Tax, Kiadb Attibele Industrial Area, Circle 7(1)(2), Attibele, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 562 107. Pan: Aaacw 5954E Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri R.E. Balasubramaniyan, Ca Respondent By : Dr. Shankar Prasad, K., Addl. Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.09.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S.This Appeal Is Against The Final Order Of The Ao Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [The Act] Dated 28.01.2022 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 On The Following Grounds:- “1. That The Order Of The Ld. Ao Insofar As It Is Prejudicial To The Interests Of The Appellant Is Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case. 2. That In The Calculation Of Alp The Ld. Ao Erred In Including Entities Such As M/S Dhp India Ltd & The Sundram Bleistahl

which,— (i) the net profit margin realised by the enterprise from an international transaction [or a specified domestic transaction] entered into with an associated enterprise is computed in relation to costs incurred or sales effected or assets employed or to be employed by the enterprise or having regard ... which,— (i) the net profit margin realised by the enterprise from an international transaction [or a specified domestic transaction] entered into with an associated enterprise is computed in relation to IT(TP)A No.339/Bang/2022 Page 10 of 17 costs incurred or sales effected or assets employed or to be employed

Biocon Biologics Limited (Formerly Known As Biocon Biologics India Limited) (Successor to Biocon Research Limited), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm It(Tp)A No.299/Bang/2022 : Asst.Year 2017-2018 M/S.Biocon Biologics Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Biocon Income-Tax, Circle 1(1)(1) V. Biologics India Limited) Bengaluru. Ground Floor, Tower 3, Semicon Park, Hosur Road, Electronics City S.O. Bangalore South – 560 100. Pan : Aagcb7796M. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Padam Chand Khincha, Ca Respondent By : Sri.Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2022 Date Of Hearing : 06.09.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 26.02.2022 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2017-2018. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee, Namely, Biocon Biologics Limited [Successor. To Biocon Research Limited With Appointed Date 01.04.2019] Is Engaged In The Carrying Out Research & Development ("R & D") Of Drugs & Drug Delivery Systems. For The Relevant Assessment Year ("Ay") 2017-18, The Return Of Income Was Filed On 30.11.2017, Declaring `Nil’ Income Under The Normal Provisions Of The I.T.Act & Book Losses As 2 It(Tp)A No.299/Bang/2022. M/S.Biocon Biologics Limited Per The Provisions Of Section 115Jb Of The I.T.Act. After Considering The Taxes Deducted At Source, The Assessee Had Claimed Refund Of Inr 4,68,29,020 In The Return Of Income.

void ab initio Grounds relating to Transfer Pricing matters 4. Adjustment on account of imputation of notional interest on outstanding receivables from Associated Enterprises Without prejudice to the ground 3 above, the Ld. AO/ TPO/ DRP has erred, in law and on facts: 4.1 in making an addition ... total income of the Appellant on account of notional interest imputed on outstanding receivables from Associated Enterprises ("AEs"). 4.2 in considering the outstanding dues from AE to be in the nature of loan and not considering the business/commercial expediency of the arrangement. 4.3 in treating the outstanding dues from

Sri. Krishna Diamonds, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

authorities have erred in not restricting the TP adjustment to AE transactions only and thereby making an adjustment in respect of transactions with non-associated enterprise also. 8. The learned AO has erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act. On the facts and in the circumstances

M/S. G Corp Spaces Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(1)(2), Bangalore

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

assessee relates to the transfer pricing adjustment done on account of interest paid on Non-convertible Debentures (NCDs) issued by the assessee to its Associated Enterprise (AE). Though the assessee IT(TP)A No.198/Bang/2022 Page 2 of 13 contented the adjustment raising various grounds, during the course of hearing ... could have paid interest during such period as well without appreciating that the appellant has been benefitted from the moratorium period granted by the associated enterprise which needs to be factored in while determining the arm’s length interest rate 3. The assessee is a company engaged in the business

Nxp India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1)(1), Bangalore

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

better sensory experience in mobile phones, personal media players, identification applications, cars and a wide range of other electronic devices. 3. The assessee’s Associated Enterprise (AE) formulates the overall strategy in respect of assessee’s customers in India and South East Asia and lays down the guidelines, procedures ... adjustments are also dismissed as not pressed. Transfer Pricing adjustment 8. The assessee company has entered into the following international transactions with its Associated Enterprises (AEs) as per the Transfer Pricing (TP) document furnished for the A.Y.2015-16:- International Transactions Receivables Payables Particulars Method /Received /Paid Purchase of Capital equipment

Levi Strauss (India) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, ground 10(c) is allowed for statistical purposes

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for the determination of the Arm’s Length Price (ALP) of the international transactions entered by the assessee with its Associate Enterprises (AEs). Subsequently, the assessee company filed return of income u/s 92CD of the I.T.Act on 30.09.2020 after entering into advance pricing agreement dated ... Appellant on account of transfer pricing adjustment in the arm's length price of the international transactions entered by the Appellant with its associated enterprise; 3. The learned TPO and the learned AO have erred, in law and in facts, by not accepting the TP documentation and economic analysis undertaken

M/S Conduent Business Services India LLP, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, ground No.1 to 3 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

interest on the same. 24. The learned AO/TPO/DRP erred, in law and in facts, in charging interest in relation to outstanding receivables due from Associated Enterprises of the Appellant. F. Grounds of appeal relating to other matters 25. That the learned AC/DRP erred, in law and in facts, in levying ... Pr.CIT, the case was referred to the TPO. The TPO analyzed the documents and observed that the assessee has undertaken international transaction with its associated enterprises as under:- 5. The TPO after analyzing all the financial results observed as under:- IT(TP)A No.3346/Bang/2018 Page

Manhattan Associates (India) Development Centre Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuit(Tp)A No. 221/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Manhattan Associates (India) Development Centre Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy 5Th & 6Th Floor, Commissioner Of B1 Block, Income Tax, Brigade Tech Gardens, Circle 4(1)(1), Brookefields, Bangalore. Vs. Kundanahalli, Whitefield, Bangalore – 560 037. Pan: Aadcm0727A Appellant Respondent

case are that during the year under consideration, the Appellant received certain capital goods such as computers, scanners, hard disks, etc. from its Associated Enterprise on free of cost basis. The assets were received for usage in rendering services to the AE. The Assessing Officer treated the value