“international transaction”

The DDIT (I.T) 2(1) vs. M/S. Reuters Ltd

Appeals are disposed off

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Assessment Year 2000 – 01

estimated on a reasonable basis". The DTAA does not refer to arm's length payment. The principles contained in the matter of income from international transaction on an arm's length price are contained in section 92 of the Income-tax Act. The principles have been clarified by the Finance ... reasoning given by the Tribunal has to be set aside. In matters of tax what has to be considered and more so in international transactions if there be a treaty, the provisions of the treaty and if the provisions of the treaty are more advantageous to an assessee, then

Refinitiv Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy DIT (I.T) 2(1), Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Assessment Year 2000 – 01

estimated on a reasonable basis". The DTAA does not refer to arm's length payment. The principles contained in the matter of income from international transaction on an arm's length price are contained in section 92 of the Income-tax Act. The principles have been clarified by the Finance ... reasoning given by the Tribunal has to be set aside. In matters of tax what has to be considered and more so in international transactions if there be a treaty, the provisions of the treaty and if the provisions of the treaty are more advantageous to an assessee, then

DDIT (I.T) 2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Reuters Ltd., Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Assessment Year 2000 – 01

estimated on a reasonable basis". The DTAA does not refer to arm's length payment. The principles contained in the matter of income from international transaction on an arm's length price are contained in section 92 of the Income-tax Act. The principles have been clarified by the Finance ... reasoning given by the Tribunal has to be set aside. In matters of tax what has to be considered and more so in international transactions if there be a treaty, the provisions of the treaty and if the provisions of the treaty are more advantageous to an assessee, then

Refinitiv Ltd., Mumbai vs. DDIT (I.Taxation) Range 2, Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Assessment Year 2000 – 01

estimated on a reasonable basis". The DTAA does not refer to arm's length payment. The principles contained in the matter of income from international transaction on an arm's length price are contained in section 92 of the Income-tax Act. The principles have been clarified by the Finance ... reasoning given by the Tribunal has to be set aside. In matters of tax what has to be considered and more so in international transactions if there be a treaty, the provisions of the treaty and if the provisions of the treaty are more advantageous to an assessee, then

M/S Wf Asian Smaller Companies Fund Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation Circle 4(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.459/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14) M/S. Wf Asian Smaller बिधम/ Acit, Circle-4(3)(2) Companies Fund Ltd Room No. 1611, 16Th Vs. C/O Ankul Goyal, Azb & Floor, Air India Building, Partners A8, Sector-4, Nariman Point, Mumbai- Noida 201301. 400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacw5648R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Deepak Chopra/Ankul Goyal Revenue By: Shri Soumedu Kumar Dash (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ao Dated 19.01.2023 U/S 147 R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Pursuant To The Direction Issued By The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) For Ay. 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Legal Issue Challenging The Action Of The Ao To Have Reopened The Original-Scrutiny-Assessment U/S 143(3) Of The Act, After Four (4) Years [From The End Of The Relevant Assessment Year] Without Satisfying The Additional Condition Precedent As Prescribed In The Proviso To Section 147(1) Of The Act. Since The Assessee Has Raised The Legal Issue Assailing The Jurisdiction Of Ao To Have Issued Notice U/S 148 Of The Act, Proposing Re-Opening Of The Original Assessment [Framed Under Scrutiny Under Section 143(3) Of The Act], We Will Adjudicate It First. For Appreciating The Legal Issue, Let Us

claimed excessive loss, deduction, allowance or relief in the return ; (ba) where the assessee has failed to furnish a report in respect of any international transaction which he was so required under section 92E; (c) where an assessment has been made, but— (i) income chargeable to tax has been under

Oracle Financial Services Software Limited (Formerly Known As I-Flex Solutions Limited), Mumbai vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Range-8(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal (Jm)

assessee’s margin was 22%. The assessee identified 43 companies, whose average margin was 9%. Accordingly, the assessee contended that its international transaction with AEs is at arms length. 6.2 The TPO rejected the T.P study of the assessee. He took the view that the assessee is performing complex functions ... Hence the difference in the margin rate falls within the tolerance limit of 5%, in which case, the international transactions 7 Oracle Finance Services Software Limited of the assessee should be considered to be at arms length. Accordingly, no transfer pricing adjustment is called for. Accordingly, we modify the order

Qad India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 9(3), Mumbai

Accordingly, Ground No. 1 raised by the Appellant is disposed off as being general in nature, Ground No. 2 relating to selection of comparables is partly allowed in terms of paragraph 5 to 6

only the current year (FY 2009-10) of the comparable companies instead of multiple year data to be used for benchmarking the Appellant's international transaction. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in upholding the decision ... case of the Appellant was selected for regular scrutiny. During the relevant previous year, the Appellant was engaged in the following international transactions – (a) provision of software support, development and related services; (b) receipt of software and related services; and (c) reimbursement of expenses; and (d) recovery of expenses

Standard Chartered Investments & Loan India Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(3), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

issued to the Appellant. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer 4. noted that the Assessee had entered into international transactions with Associated Enterprises (AEs) and therefore, made a reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for computation of Arm’s Length Price (ALP) under Section 92CA ... TPO/Assessing Officer and submitted that the TPO was justified in rejecting the average rate of interest adopted by the Appellant to benchmark the international transaction under consideration. The Ld. Departmental Representative further submitted that the loan transaction identified by the Appellant was between SCB India and an individual which could

Dhl Logistics P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhdhl Logistics Private Vs. National E-Assessment Limited, 201A, Silver Centre Utopia, Cardinal Gracias Additional/Joint/Deputy/ Road, Chakala, Assistant Commissioner Andheri (East) Of Income Tax/Income Mumbai – 400099 Tax Officer, National E- Assessment Centre Delhi स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacm6824H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Madhur Agrawal/Fenil Bhatt/ Darshan Dalal Respondent By : Jayant B Jhaveri Date Of Hearing 19.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.06.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Cit(Drp-1), Mumbai, Dated 15.03.2021 For A.Y. 2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Order Dated 1 November 2019 Passed By The Learned Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Transfer Pricing)-1(2)(2), Mumbai ('Ld. Tpo) Under Section 92Ca Of The Act Is Beyond The Time Limit Prescribed Under Section 92Ca(3A) R.W.S 153 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Act), Thus Making The Transfer Pricing Order & Resultant Final Assessment Order Dated 30 April 2021 Is Illegal, Bad In Law, Null & Void & Liable To Be Quashed. The Following Grounds Are Without Prejudice To Ground 1 Above.

Officer CAO)/ 1d TPO in confirming the addition of INR 65,03,77,598/- to the income of the Appellant by holding that its international transactions pertaining to its freight forwarding segment do not satisfy the arm's length principle envisaged under the Act. 3. In doing ... Logistics Limited which is a functionally incomparable company in the final set of comparable companies. The Appellant prays that the book value of the international transactions pertaining to the freight forwarding segment of the Appellant should be held to be the arm's length price of the said transactions

M/S Greatship (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Comm.of Income Tax 5(1)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S Greatship (India) Vs. Assistant Commissioner Ltd., C/O, Kalyaniwalla Of Income Tax -5(1)(1) Mistry Llp, Esplanade Room No. 568, Aayakar House, 29, Hazarimal Bhavan, M.K. Road, Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400001 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcg8542K Appellant .. Respondent

AO/TPO/Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) erred in holding that the transaction of giving financial guarantees by the Appellant on behalf of its AES is an "international transaction" under Section 928 of the Act. P a g e | 2 M/s Greatship (India) Ltd. Vs. ACIT, 5(1)(1) 4. The AO/TPO ... r.w.s 144C of the Act on 24.09.2021 and proposed addition of Rs.2,81,85,557/- on account of guarantee commission in relation to the international transactions entered into by the assessee company with its associated enterprise during the F.Y. 2017-18 relevant to assessment year under consideration. The Assessing officer

Star India Pvt. Ltd. (Sucessor of Star Sports India Pvt. Ltd.- (Ssipl), Mumbai vs. ACIT 16 (1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed to the extent indicated above and Ground

Bench: Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S Star India Pvt. Ltd. A C I T (Successor Of Star Sports India -16(1) Pvt. Ltd.) Room No. 439, Star House, Urmi Estate Vs. Aayakar Bhavan 95, Ganpantrao Kadam Marg M.K. Road, Lower Parel (W) Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400013 Pan – Aaacn1335Q Appellant Respondent Co No. 114/Mum/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) A C I T -16(1) M/S Star India Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 439, Aayakar Bhavan (Successor Of Star Sports India M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Pvt. Ltd.) Vs. Star House, Urmi Estate 95, Ganpantrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel (W) Mumbai 400013 Cross Objector Appellant In Appeal Assessee By: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr Advocate Revenue By: Shri Biswanath Das –Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.06.2023 O R D E R Per: Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 01. Assessee Has Filed Appeal For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15 Against The Assessment Order Passed By The Acit-16(1), Mumbai

picked up for scrutiny by issue of notice under section 143(2) of the Act dated 28.08.2015. 06. Assessee has entered into several international transactions and therefore reference was made under section 92CA of the Act on 31.08.2016 to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) in the name of Star Sports ... Limited under section 92CA(3) of the Act on 31.10.2017 [ After the date of amalgamation i.e. 21/11/2014] wherein the total adjustment to the international transaction was made at Rs.93,28,24,621/-. During T P Assessment, assessee stated umpteen times about the fact of amalgamation by submitting all the details