← All Phrases

“advance pricing agreement”

Transfer PricingSection 92CCSection 92CC125 judgments

Judgments citing advance pricing agreement

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

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

ITA 340/VIZ/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.340/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21) & S.A. No. 15/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21) Teejay India Private Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Plot No. 15, Brandix, Apsez, Income Tax, Pudimadaka Road, Atchutapuram Circle-5(1), Mandal, Visakhapatnam-530011. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaaco9452H (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri Darpan Kirpalani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

exclusively for the purpose of business operations. 2.4. Ignoring the fact that the appellant has filed an application for entering into unilateral advanced pricing agreement with the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) covering the 6 Teejay India Private Limited vs. DCIT transaction of payment of royalty and the relevant ... whereas this Bench has remitted the mater back to the Ld. TPO to decide the case on merits subject to outcome of the Advance Pricing Agreement (APA) with CBDT by the assessee. He further submitted that the Ld. TPO has followed the “other method” 9 Teejay India Private Limited

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Tirunelveli vs. Ms.Phillips Foods India Private Limited, Tuticorin

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 739/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 739/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2015-16 & C.O No.17/Chny/2024 [In I.T.A. No.739/Chny/2024] The Assistant Phillips Foods India Pvt. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Ltd., Tax, C-75/76, Sipcot Industrial Circle 1, Complex, Tirunelveli Tuticorin Central Stand S.O. Tuticorin – 628 002. Pan: Aabcp 7916Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Cit िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Ms. K. Amulya, Ca & Shri Vinay Jain, Ca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07.07.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.07.2025

For Appellant: Ms. K. Amulya, CA &For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(3)Section 250Section 92C

ground challenging the validity of TPO order and the final assessment order. As regards the issues on merits, the assessee furnished the Unilateral Advance Pricing Agreement (APA) entered on 25.08.2023 between CBDT for the assessment years 2021-22 to 2025-26 in support of its functional analysis and contention that ... justified in adjudicating based on the additional grounds and evidences filed by the assessee in the form of Advance Pricing Agreement (APA) dated 25.08.2023, when the same document did not exist while passing the order u/s 92CA(3) dated 01.11.2019 and no remand report was called for in accordance with

Fidelity Information Services India Private Limited, Punjab vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 998/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 998/Chd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Fidelity Information Services Vs The Dcit, Chandigarh, India Private Ltd., 2Nd A-45, Industrial Area, Sector 74, Phase 8B, Sas Nagar. स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aagcs0395D अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By: Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate & Ms. Sumisha, Ca Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.05.2025 Hybrid Hearing Order Per Raj Pal Yadav, Vp The Assessee Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal Against The Assessment Order Dated 31.07.2024 Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13)/144B Of The Income Tax Act In

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate & Ms. Sumisha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234ASection 270A

services to its customers who happens to be an AE of the assessee, namely, ‘Fidelity Information Services LLC, USA'. The assessee had an Advance Pricing Agreement with the CBDT. The software development services of the assessee provided at the respective places and therefore, its employee has to undertake foreign travel ... mark up of 15% and since the additional mark up of 1.60% (over and above 15%) has been determined pursuant to the unilateral Advance Pricing Agreement entered into with CBDT dated_6/02/2017, the additional revenues of Rs 2,73,90,440/- has been offered as part of the modified return