M/S. RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in IT(TP) A No

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 1782/Del/2014 2. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 781/Del/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. The Dcit बनाम/ 12Th Floor, Devika Tower Circle-21(1), New Vs. 6, Nehru Place, New Delhi Delhi/ 110 019 Addl.Cit Range-15 New Delhi "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr0127N .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi, Ms.Urvashi Shodhan & Shri P.Shah, Ars ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit-Dr

price and the issue price is a benefit to employees. Therefore, deferred employee compensation is a component of employee remuneration and actual loss to the company. Therefore, this is only a mode of discharging the liability of employees, and it is an ascertained liability. Accordingly, the assessee contended that the amount debited/amortized in ITR of earlier years had been correctly

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

prices from 80IB/IC units to the company. xi. Why not after excluding other income like royalty, technological r-license income, export incentives, misc. Income, and sundries etc. which are not eligible for 80IB/IC deduction, the determination of eligible profits is done, xii. The company does trading activity also. Why the trading profit should not be excluded for determining eligible income

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

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and CO filed by the Department is being dismissed for assessment year 2010-11

transfer pricing adjustment, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming levy of I.T.A Nos.1389 to1392/Ahd/2019 & CO Nos. 16 to 19/Ahd/2022 Page No. 23 Shell Global Solutions International B.V. vs. DCIT & ACIT(IT) vs. Shell Global Solutions International B.V. penalty under Section 271(l)(c) of the Act even in a situation wherein the learned AO has neither referred

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

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and CO filed by the Department is being dismissed for assessment year 2010-11

transfer pricing adjustment, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming levy of I.T.A Nos.1389 to1392/Ahd/2019 & CO Nos. 16 to 19/Ahd/2022 Page No. 23 Shell Global Solutions International B.V. vs. DCIT & ACIT(IT) vs. Shell Global Solutions International B.V. penalty under Section 271(l)(c) of the Act even in a situation wherein the learned AO has neither referred

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

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and CO filed by the Department is being dismissed for assessment year 2010-11

transfer pricing adjustment, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming levy of I.T.A Nos.1389 to1392/Ahd/2019 & CO Nos. 16 to 19/Ahd/2022 Page No. 23 Shell Global Solutions International B.V. vs. DCIT & ACIT(IT) vs. Shell Global Solutions International B.V. penalty under Section 271(l)(c) of the Act even in a situation wherein the learned AO has neither referred

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

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and CO filed by the Department is being dismissed for assessment year 2010-11

transfer pricing adjustment, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming levy of I.T.A Nos.1389 to1392/Ahd/2019 & CO Nos. 16 to 19/Ahd/2022 Page No. 23 Shell Global Solutions International B.V. vs. DCIT & ACIT(IT) vs. Shell Global Solutions International B.V. penalty under Section 271(l)(c) of the Act even in a situation wherein the learned AO has neither referred

ATUL LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Appeal is dismissed

250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) pertaining to Assessment Year (A.Y) 2005-06 . 2. Ground No. 1 raised by the Assessee reads as under: 1 Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming addition made by AO of Rs. 2,70,80,490/- on account of adjustments

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI PORT & SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

Transfer Pricing Officer, it was noted that the assessee had extended a corporate guarantee to the State Bank of India, Hong Kong branch, for acquisition of aircraft by its associated enterprises. It was explained by the assessee that the guarantee given by the assessee is a generic and non-explicit guarantee which binds the principal shareholders in general anyway

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI PORT & SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

Transfer Pricing Officer, it was noted that the assessee had extended a corporate guarantee to the State Bank of India, Hong Kong branch, for acquisition of aircraft by its associated enterprises. It was explained by the assessee that the guarantee given by the assessee is a generic and non-explicit guarantee which binds the principal shareholders in general anyway

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

Transfer Pricing Officer who has wrongly charged an additional mark up of 25 basis points on account of currency risks without considering the factual background of the transaction. 2.5 Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred in upholding the order of Assessing Officer

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. , BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

Transfer Pricing Officer who has wrongly charged an additional mark up of 25 basis points on account of currency risks without considering the factual background of the transaction. 2.5 Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred in upholding the order of Assessing Officer

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. , BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

Transfer Pricing Officer who has wrongly charged an additional mark up of 25 basis points on account of currency risks without considering the factual background of the transaction. 2.5 Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred in upholding the order of Assessing Officer

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

Transfer Pricing Officer who has wrongly charged an additional mark up of 25 basis points on account of currency risks without considering the factual background of the transaction. 2.5 Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred in upholding the order of Assessing Officer

LONSEN KIRI CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, (OSD)-1, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Transfer Pricing study report. Similarly, in respect of Reactive Blue 250, the appellant had also not considered and differentiated between the geographical market. Therefore, the appellant should not raise objection of this point of time now. Regarding the objection taken by the appellant regarding difference in quantity, it is noted that the appellant has contended that the quantities in bulk

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. LAMDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Transfer Pricing Guidelines which reiterates that though ideally the arm's length principles should be applied on a transaction by transaction basis, there are often situations where separate transactions are so closely linked or continuous that they cannot be evaluated adequately on a separate basis. OECD guidelines provide a number of illustrations to substantiate 'closely linked or continuous' test which

LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Transfer Pricing Guidelines which reiterates that though ideally the arm's length principles should be applied on a transaction by transaction basis, there are often situations where separate transactions are so closely linked or continuous that they cannot be evaluated adequately on a separate basis. OECD guidelines provide a number of illustrations to substantiate 'closely linked or continuous' test which

LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT. CIT, RANGE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Transfer Pricing Guidelines which reiterates that though ideally the arm's length principles should be applied on a transaction by transaction basis, there are often situations where separate transactions are so closely linked or continuous that they cannot be evaluated adequately on a separate basis. OECD guidelines provide a number of illustrations to substantiate 'closely linked or continuous' test which

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Transfer Pricing Guidelines which reiterates that though ideally the arm's length principles should be applied on a transaction by transaction basis, there are often situations where separate transactions are so closely linked or continuous that they cannot be evaluated adequately on a separate basis. OECD guidelines provide a number of illustrations to substantiate 'closely linked or continuous' test which

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Transfer Pricing Guidelines which reiterates that though ideally the arm's length principles should be applied on a transaction by transaction basis, there are often situations where separate transactions are so closely linked or continuous that they cannot be evaluated adequately on a separate basis. OECD guidelines provide a number of illustrations to substantiate 'closely linked or continuous' test which