ATUL LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Atul Limited Acit, Cir.1(1)(1) Atul House, Gi Patel Mark Vs Ahmedabad. Mithila Society, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aabca 2390 M (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/05/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

144C(13), determining total income at Rs.178,23,60,063/- as against the returned income of Rs.168,29,62,390/-, after making the following additions: i. disallowance of Rs.8,26,43,616/- under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii), which was also added back while computing book profits under section 115JB; ii. disallowance of Rs.1

INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

144C of the Act, vide assessment order dated 28.01.2019, determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.430,72,97,310/-. The AO made following additions/disallowances: ITA No.281 and 222/Ahd/2021 3 Sr. Particulars of Addition/Disallowance Amount (Rs.) No. 1 Transfer Pricing Adjustment on account of interest 15,18,41,720 on advances to AEs 2 Disallowance of Depreciation on Goodwill

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

144C of the Act, vide assessment order dated 28.01.2019, determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.430,72,97,310/-. The AO made following additions/disallowances: ITA No.281 and 222/Ahd/2021 3 Sr. Particulars of Addition/Disallowance Amount (Rs.) No. 1 Transfer Pricing Adjustment on account of interest 15,18,41,720 on advances to AEs 2 Disallowance of Depreciation on Goodwill

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-1, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

15. The learned AO has erred on the facts and in law in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 274 r.w.s 271(l)(c) of the Act against the Appellant. The Appellant reserves the right to add, amend, alter or vary all or any of the above grounds of appeal as they or their representative may think fit.” 79. We observe

M/S. SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. CIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

15. The learned AO has erred on the facts and in law in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 274 r.w.s 271(l)(c) of the Act against the Appellant. The Appellant reserves the right to add, amend, alter or vary all or any of the above grounds of appeal as they or their representative may think fit.” 79. We observe

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-2, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

15. The learned AO has erred on the facts and in law in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 274 r.w.s 271(l)(c) of the Act against the Appellant. The Appellant reserves the right to add, amend, alter or vary all or any of the above grounds of appeal as they or their representative may think fit.” 79. We observe

M/S. SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. CIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

15. The learned AO has erred on the facts and in law in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 274 r.w.s 271(l)(c) of the Act against the Appellant. The Appellant reserves the right to add, amend, alter or vary all or any of the above grounds of appeal as they or their representative may think fit.” 79. We observe

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INT.TAXA.-2, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

15. The learned AO has erred on the facts and in law in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 274 r.w.s 271(l)(c) of the Act against the Appellant. The Appellant reserves the right to add, amend, alter or vary all or any of the above grounds of appeal as they or their representative may think fit.” 79. We observe

M/S. SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. CIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

15. The learned AO has erred on the facts and in law in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 274 r.w.s 271(l)(c) of the Act against the Appellant. The Appellant reserves the right to add, amend, alter or vary all or any of the above grounds of appeal as they or their representative may think fit.” 79. We observe

M/S. SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. CIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

15. The learned AO has erred on the facts and in law in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 274 r.w.s 271(l)(c) of the Act against the Appellant. The Appellant reserves the right to add, amend, alter or vary all or any of the above grounds of appeal as they or their representative may think fit.” 79. We observe

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

15. The learned AO has erred on the facts and in law in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 274 r.w.s 271(l)(c) of the Act against the Appellant. The Appellant reserves the right to add, amend, alter or vary all or any of the above grounds of appeal as they or their representative may think fit.” 79. We observe

M/S. SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-2, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

15. The learned AO has erred on the facts and in law in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 274 r.w.s 271(l)(c) of the Act against the Appellant. The Appellant reserves the right to add, amend, alter or vary all or any of the above grounds of appeal as they or their representative may think fit.” 79. We observe

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

15. The learned AO has erred on the facts and in law in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 274 r.w.s 271(l)(c) of the Act against the Appellant. The Appellant reserves the right to add, amend, alter or vary all or any of the above grounds of appeal as they or their representative may think fit.” 79. We observe

CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

Appeal are dismissed as not pressed

144C passed by the Assessing Officer, the Appellant wishes to raise the following Grounds of Appeal for the kind adjudication of the Hon'ble ITAT: 1. That the learned Assessing Officer erred in law and on facts in making upward adjustments on international transactions under the provisions relating to Transfer Pricing in respect of the following three issues: a. Addition

SHELL GLOBAL SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL B.V,,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-2, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, while the CO filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarwith Co No.20/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 1783/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shell Global Solutions International B.V.,, Acit, International C/O. Bsr Associates & Llp Vs Taxation-1 903, Commerce House V Ahmedabad. Nr.Vodafone House Prahaladnagar Corporation Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaics 3589 H (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2024 & 06/12/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/12/2024

144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ITA No.2390/Ahd/2018 & 1783/Ahd/2019 with CO 2 ("the Act" for short). The Revenue has filed cross-objection in the assessee’s appeal for Asst.Year 2014-15 above. 2. It was common ground that the issues raised in both the set of appeals were identical. Therefore, both the appeals & CO were heard together

SHELL GLOBAL SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL B.V,,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, while the CO filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarwith Co No.20/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 1783/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shell Global Solutions International B.V.,, Acit, International C/O. Bsr Associates & Llp Vs Taxation-1 903, Commerce House V Ahmedabad. Nr.Vodafone House Prahaladnagar Corporation Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaics 3589 H (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2024 & 06/12/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/12/2024

144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ITA No.2390/Ahd/2018 & 1783/Ahd/2019 with CO 2 ("the Act" for short). The Revenue has filed cross-objection in the assessee’s appeal for Asst.Year 2014-15 above. 2. It was common ground that the issues raised in both the set of appeals were identical. Therefore, both the appeals & CO were heard together

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. ( ERSTWHILE RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMITED),BARODA vs. THE ACIT,CENT.CIRCLE-1, BARODA

TDS u/s 40(a)(ia). 2.3 Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. Assessing Officer / DRP ought to have appreciated that since the payments had already been made during the year under consideration and nothing was payable as at the end of the relevant year, the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act were not applicable and consequently

TOSHIBA TECHNICAL SERVICES INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. THE ADIT.,(INTL.TAXN.)-2, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Miss Suchitra Raghunath Kambleassessment Year :2015-16 Toshiba Technical Services Vs. Acit, International International Corporation Taxation-2 (India Project Office) Ahmedabad. B-/12 Vijay Wadi Niwas Chs Ltd. Lokmanya Tilak Road Mulund East, Mumbai Pan : Aabct 9577 D

B-/12 Vijay Wadi Niwas CHS Ltd. Lokmanya Tilak Road Mulund East, Mumbai PAN : AABCT 9577 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Yogesh Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri Atul Pandey, SR-DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 19/07/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 12/10/2022 आदेश/O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT

HAGGLUNDS DRIVES (INDIA) PVT. LTD. ( NOW MERGED IN BOSCH REXROTH (INDIA) LTD.),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS liable, but the AO found that despite being responsible for deducting tax on the total amount, the Assessee failed to do so. The Assessee did not offer any satisfactory explanation for this non-compliance. Accordingly, Ld. Assessing Officer held that given the clear requirements under Sections 194J and 194C of the Act, and the Assessee’s inability to demonstrate