← All Phrases

“international transaction”

Transfer PricingSection 92BSection 92B3,408 judgments

The decision most relied on for international transaction is Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (374 ITR 118), cited in 499 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on international transaction

Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
374 ITR 118 · 2015 · High Court
499
citing judgments

The existence of an international transaction for Advertising and Marketing Promotion (AMP) expenditure requires the revenue to discharge the burden of proof. An explanation inserted under Section 92B does not automatically make AMP expenditure an international transaction.

CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd.
345 ITR 241 · 2012 · High Court
422
citing judgments

Transfer pricing adjustments for outstanding receivables are permissible only if the Tax Officer establishes, through analysis over a period, a pattern indicating an international transaction intended to benefit an associated enterprise. The Tax Officer cannot question purely business decisions like royalty payments or exceed jurisdiction by applying cost-benefit analysis to determine the arm's length price of services.

India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (SC); and Vodafone International Holdings B.V v. Union of India
341 ITR 1 · 2012 · Supreme Court
295
citing judgments

Legitimate tax planning is permissible, allowing taxpayers to arrange their affairs to minimize tax liabilities while respecting the "look at test" for transaction genuineness and the separate entity principle in corporate taxation. The source of funds for treaty-beneficial structures does not automatically invalidate the transaction.

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. CIT
381 ITR 117 · 2016 · High Court
220
citing judgments

The Bright Line Test (BLT) is not a recognized method under the Income-tax Act and Rules for benchmarking advertising, marketing, and promotion (AMP) expenses or for determining the existence of an international transaction or its Arm's Length Price. The Revenue must first establish the existence and price of an international transaction before seeking an ALP adjustment.

Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India
368 ITR 1 · 2014 · High Court
172
citing judgments

The issue of shares and share premium is a capital account transaction, not an income-generating event, therefore Chapter X (Transfer Pricing) provisions are not attracted to deem notional or hypothetical income from such transactions.

Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT
24 ITR 506 · 1953 · Supreme Court
156
citing judgments

One cannot make a taxable profit or loss from transactions with oneself, as profit only arises from dealings with external third parties, even when transferring assets between different accounts or divisions of the same entity.

PCIT v. Redington (India) Ltd.
430 ITR 298 · 2021 · High Court
132
citing judgments

A corporate guarantee issued to Associated Enterprises (AEs) is an international transaction under Section 92B, requiring adjustments for guarantee commission due to inherent risk. The reasonable arm's length rate for benchmarking such corporate guarantees can be determined using internal or external comparable uncontrolled prices.

Bausch & Lomb Eye Care (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional CIT
381 ITR 227 · 2016 · High Court
127
citing judgments

The existence of an international transaction must be established before its arm's length price can be determined. An alleged 'excessive' AMP expenditure cannot unilaterally expand the scope of an international transaction if its existence is contested.

Judgments citing international transaction

Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 694/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

learned TPO") and the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel ("DRP") have erred in determining the Arm's Length Price (`ALP') of the following international transactions of the Appellant: • Interest on loan advanced; • Interest on the outstanding balance from the Associated Enterprise ("AE"); and • Adjustment in 'respect to the corporate guarantees ... learned AO/learned TPO have ignored the fact that Guarantee in the instant case is not in the nature of service and therefore not an international transaction. 2. Corporate Tax 3. Disallowance of deduction claimed under section 35(2AB) of the Act 3.1 The learned AO erred in disallowing the weighted

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 621/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

learned TPO") and the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel ("DRP") have erred in determining the Arm's Length Price (`ALP') of the following international transactions of the Appellant: • Interest on loan advanced; • Interest on the outstanding balance from the Associated Enterprise ("AE"); and • Adjustment in 'respect to the corporate guarantees ... learned AO/learned TPO have ignored the fact that Guarantee in the instant case is not in the nature of service and therefore not an international transaction. 2. Corporate Tax 3. Disallowance of deduction claimed under section 35(2AB) of the Act 3.1 The learned AO erred in disallowing the weighted

Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 468/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

learned TPO") and the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel ("DRP") have erred in determining the Arm's Length Price (`ALP') of the following international transactions of the Appellant: • Interest on loan advanced; • Interest on the outstanding balance from the Associated Enterprise ("AE"); and • Adjustment in 'respect to the corporate guarantees ... learned AO/learned TPO have ignored the fact that Guarantee in the instant case is not in the nature of service and therefore not an international transaction. 2. Corporate Tax 3. Disallowance of deduction claimed under section 35(2AB) of the Act 3.1 The learned AO erred in disallowing the weighted

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 296/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

learned TPO") and the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel ("DRP") have erred in determining the Arm's Length Price (`ALP') of the following international transactions of the Appellant: • Interest on loan advanced; • Interest on the outstanding balance from the Associated Enterprise ("AE"); and • Adjustment in 'respect to the corporate guarantees ... learned AO/learned TPO have ignored the fact that Guarantee in the instant case is not in the nature of service and therefore not an international transaction. 2. Corporate Tax 3. Disallowance of deduction claimed under section 35(2AB) of the Act 3.1 The learned AO erred in disallowing the weighted

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 1119/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

learned TPO") and the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel ("DRP") have erred in determining the Arm's Length Price (`ALP') of the following international transactions of the Appellant: • Interest on loan advanced; • Interest on the outstanding balance from the Associated Enterprise ("AE"); and • Adjustment in 'respect to the corporate guarantees ... learned AO/learned TPO have ignored the fact that Guarantee in the instant case is not in the nature of service and therefore not an international transaction. 2. Corporate Tax 3. Disallowance of deduction claimed under section 35(2AB) of the Act 3.1 The learned AO erred in disallowing the weighted

Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1700/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usassessment Year: 2011-12 Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 4Th Floor, Dhaka House, Circle-8(2), 18/17, Wea, Pusa Lane, Cr Building, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaace0138N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Sumisha Murgai, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surender Pal, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.02.2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 144C R.W.S. 143(3), Dated 29.01.2016, Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Filed An Application Seeking Withdrawal Of The Appeal On The Ground That The Assessee Has Entered Into A Unilateral Advance Pricing Agreement With The Cbdt On 4Th December, 2019 In Respect Of The International Transactions Undertaken By The Assessee. The Subject International Transaction Which Is Currently Under Dispute Includes Receipt Of Second Line Support Services By The Assessee From Its Aes. She Accordingly Submitted That The Assessee Wants To Withdraw The Appeal. In Absence Of Any Objection From The Side Of The Ld. Dr, The Request Of The Assessee Seeking Permission Of The Bench For Withdrawal Of The Appeal Is Allowed & The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Dismissed As ‘Withdrawn.’

For Appellant: Ms Sumisha Murgai, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT, DR
Section 144C

ground that the assessee has entered into a unilateral advance pricing agreement with the CBDT on 4th December, 2019 in respect of the international transactions undertaken by the assessee. The subject international transaction which is currently under dispute includes receipt of second line support services by the assessee from

Neogenetics Foods Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 361/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.361/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Neogenetics Foods Private Limited, Vs. Dcit, Level 14 & 15, Concorde Towers, Ub City, 1 Circle - 3(1)(1), Vittal Malya Road, Ub City, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 001. Pan : Aadcn 7689 L Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Narendra Kumar Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Kumar Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 144CSection 92BSection 92C

sections 92, 92C, 92D and 92E, “specified domestic transaction” in case of an assessee means any of the following transactions, not being an international transaction, namely:— (i) any expenditure in respect of which payment has been made or is to be made to a person referred to in clause ... assessee in the previous year exceeds a sum of twenty crore rupees. Section 92(2), as amended provided that where in an international transaction or specified domestic transaction, two or more associated enterprises enter into a mutual agreement or arrangement for the allocation or apportionment of, or any contribution

Harman Connected Services Corporation India Private Limited (Formerly Known As M/S Core Objects India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 682/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 92C

issue, the main issue that arises for consideration is with regard to determination of Arm’s Length Price (ALP) in respect of an international transaction of rendering software development services by the assessee to its Associated Enterprises (AE). 4. The assessee is the subsidiary of Core Objects Software ... engaged in the provision of software development and related services. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2011-12, one of the international transactions that took place between the assessee and its AEs was the provision of software development services by the assessee

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in:

ITA 5022/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 234ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

Assessee filing the return of income for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 (subject assessment years), since the Respondent- Assessee had undertaken international transaction with its Associated Enterprises (AEs), the AO referred the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for determination of the Arm's Length Price ... international transaction entered into by the Respondent-Assessee with its AE; (Hi) the TPO determined upward adjustment of Rs. 56,30,78,638/-; (iv) the Respondent- Assessee approached Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). which declined to interfere with the transfer pricing adjustment made by the AO; (v) the Respondent- Assessee thereafter

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in:

ITA 5021/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 234ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

Assessee filing the return of income for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 (subject assessment years), since the Respondent- Assessee had undertaken international transaction with its Associated Enterprises (AEs), the AO referred the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for determination of the Arm's Length Price ... international transaction entered into by the Respondent-Assessee with its AE; (Hi) the TPO determined upward adjustment of Rs. 56,30,78,638/-; (iv) the Respondent- Assessee approached Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). which declined to interfere with the transfer pricing adjustment made by the AO; (v) the Respondent- Assessee thereafter

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in:

ITA 5020/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 234ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

Assessee filing the return of income for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 (subject assessment years), since the Respondent- Assessee had undertaken international transaction with its Associated Enterprises (AEs), the AO referred the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for determination of the Arm's Length Price ... international transaction entered into by the Respondent-Assessee with its AE; (Hi) the TPO determined upward adjustment of Rs. 56,30,78,638/-; (iv) the Respondent- Assessee approached Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). which declined to interfere with the transfer pricing adjustment made by the AO; (v) the Respondent- Assessee thereafter

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in:

ITA 4561/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 234ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

Assessee filing the return of income for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 (subject assessment years), since the Respondent- Assessee had undertaken international transaction with its Associated Enterprises (AEs), the AO referred the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for determination of the Arm's Length Price ... international transaction entered into by the Respondent-Assessee with its AE; (Hi) the TPO determined upward adjustment of Rs. 56,30,78,638/-; (iv) the Respondent- Assessee approached Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). which declined to interfere with the transfer pricing adjustment made by the AO; (v) the Respondent- Assessee thereafter

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in:

ITA 4560/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 234ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

Assessee filing the return of income for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 (subject assessment years), since the Respondent- Assessee had undertaken international transaction with its Associated Enterprises (AEs), the AO referred the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for determination of the Arm's Length Price ... international transaction entered into by the Respondent-Assessee with its AE; (Hi) the TPO determined upward adjustment of Rs. 56,30,78,638/-; (iv) the Respondent- Assessee approached Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). which declined to interfere with the transfer pricing adjustment made by the AO; (v) the Respondent- Assessee thereafter

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in:

ITA 4559/DEL/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 234ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

Assessee filing the return of income for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 (subject assessment years), since the Respondent- Assessee had undertaken international transaction with its Associated Enterprises (AEs), the AO referred the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for determination of the Arm's Length Price ... international transaction entered into by the Respondent-Assessee with its AE; (Hi) the TPO determined upward adjustment of Rs. 56,30,78,638/-; (iv) the Respondent- Assessee approached Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). which declined to interfere with the transfer pricing adjustment made by the AO; (v) the Respondent- Assessee thereafter

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Itochu India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the CO of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2244/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Lakshmi Narayanan, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 92C

made to the Transfer Pricing Officer, New Delhi for determining the arm’s length price u/s 92CA(3) of the Act in respect of international transactions entered into by the assessee during the financial year 2009-10. The issue was examined by the DCIT [TPO-1(5)] and vide ... order dated 29.01.2014 passed u/s 92CA of the Act determining the difference in arm’s length price in the international transactions of the assessee with its Associated Enterprises (AE) at Rs.8,67,98,011/-. The AO passed order on 29.04.2014 considering the order of the TPO. In addition

Aurigo Software Technologies Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 178/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.178/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Aurigo Software Technologies Private Limited, Vs. Ito, Ajmera Aditya Summit, No.3D1, Ground Floor, Ward-1(1)(1), 7Th C Main Road, 3Rd Block, Koramangala, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 034. Pan : Aacca 5309 D Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, Advocate Revenue By : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.02.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)

No.178/Bang/2021 Page 2 of 19 ("AEs"). In terms of Sec.92B(1) of the Act, the transaction of providing SWD Services was an “international transaction” i.e., a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are nonresidents, in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of tangible ... provided to any one or more of such enterprises. In terms of Sec.92(1) of the Act, the any income arising from an international transaction shall be computed having regard to the arm’s length price. In this appeal by the Assessee, the dispute is with regard to determination

Dsv Solution P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/Asstt/CIT/ITO, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 922/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaledvs Solutions Pvt Ltd Vs. Additional/Joint/ A-203, The Qube, Cts Assistant No. 1489, Mv Road, Commissioner Of Marol, Andheri East, Income Tax, National Mumbai – 400059. E- Assessment Centre, Delhi. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacu5306L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms.Karishmaprataphekar.Ar Respondent By : Dr.Yogesh Kamat. Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 24.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 11.02.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm:

For Appellant: Ms.KarishmaPrataphekar.ARFor Respondent: Dr.Yogesh Kamat. CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 92C(1)

issued. The A.O. on perusal of the financial statements and Form no 3CEB found that there are international transactions with Associate Enterprises (A.E) and the matter was referred to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for determination of Arm’s length price (A.L.P). Whereas, the TPO has issued the notice ... documents supporting the ALP. In compliance the Ld. AR of the appeared from time to time and submitted the details in relation to international transactions with its AE. The assessee has international DSV Solutions P. Ltd., Mumbai. transactions referred at page 2 Para 5.1 of the order as under

M/S First American (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-11(3), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 43/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-I(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 10A

During the pendency of the appeal, the assessee entered into a unilateral Advance Pricing Agreement (‘APA’ for short) dated 28.03.2016 in respect of the international transactions of provision of SWD and ITE services to its AE, FATICO, for the period from AYs 2014-15 to 2018-19. The APA also ... filed the above appeal before this Hon’ble Tribunal. In view of the aforesaid APA entered into by the assessee in respect of its international transactions of provision of SWD and ITE services to its AE, FATICO, the cross-appeals filed before this Hon’ble Tribunal, insofar as they relate

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bengaluru vs. M/S First American (India) Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2586/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-I(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 10A

During the pendency of the appeal, the assessee entered into a unilateral Advance Pricing Agreement (‘APA’ for short) dated 28.03.2016 in respect of the international transactions of provision of SWD and ITE services to its AE, FATICO, for the period from AYs 2014-15 to 2018-19. The APA also ... filed the above appeal before this Hon’ble Tribunal. In view of the aforesaid APA entered into by the assessee in respect of its international transactions of provision of SWD and ITE services to its AE, FATICO, the cross-appeals filed before this Hon’ble Tribunal, insofar as they relate

M/S Robert Bosch Engineering and Business Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed as indicated above and the appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 608/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 608/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Robert Bosch The Deputy Engineering & Business Commissioner Of Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, #123, Industrial Layout, Large Tax Payers Unit, Hosur Road, Koramangala, Circle 1, Bangalore – 560095. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aaacr7108R Appellant Respondent & It(Tp)A No. 445/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 (By Revenue) : Shri Percy Padiwala, Sr. Assessee By Advocate : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Cit Revenue By Dr (Osd) Date Of Hearing : 20-12-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 02-02-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Cross Appeals Are Filed By Assessee As Well As Revenue Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 28.01.2016 By The Ld.Dcit, Ltu, Circle -1, Bangalore U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Act For Assessment Year 2011-12. In Revenue’S Appeal, The Following Grounds Are Raised. “1. The Directions Of Drp Is Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case.

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 80J

Appeal: 1. The Appellant is engaged in the business of Software Development and IT enabled services. During the year, the Appellant had entered into International Transactions and Page 5 of 33 IT(TP)A Nos. 445 & 608/Bang/2016 therefore as required under Chapter X of the Income ... notice u/s. 143(2) was issued to the assessee on 06.08.2012 and duly served. Notice u/s 142(1) were issued and duly served. As international transaction exceeded Rs.15 crores the case was referred to the Ld.TPO to determine the Arm’s length price vide this office letter dated