THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. , AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

transfer pricing adjustment of Rs.60,83,440/- pertaining to corporate guarantee fee; as made by the TPO and affirmed in dispute resolution penal; "DRP"s directions. The said lower authorities hold that the assessee ought to have charged @1.24% on corporate guarantee amount of Rs.49,06,00,000/-. The assessee admittedly had provided the corporate guarantee in question

M/S. NIRMA LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals for AYs 2012-

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

Transfer Pricing Officer passed an order u/s. 92CA(5) r.w.s. 154 of the I. T. Act dtd. 18.07.2014 revised the addition on account of benchmarking of loan to Rs. 13,92,104/-. The copy of the order u/s 92CA(5) r.w.s. 154 of the I. T. Act was furnished. Appellant submitted that loan granted to its AE (subsidiary company) should

JT. CTI (OSD), CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NIRMA LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals for AYs 2012-

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

Transfer Pricing Officer passed an order u/s. 92CA(5) r.w.s. 154 of the I. T. Act dtd. 18.07.2014 revised the addition on account of benchmarking of loan to Rs. 13,92,104/-. The copy of the order u/s 92CA(5) r.w.s. 154 of the I. T. Act was furnished. Appellant submitted that loan granted to its AE (subsidiary company) should

NIRMA LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals for AYs 2012-

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

Transfer Pricing Officer passed an order u/s. 92CA(5) r.w.s. 154 of the I. T. Act dtd. 18.07.2014 revised the addition on account of benchmarking of loan to Rs. 13,92,104/-. The copy of the order u/s 92CA(5) r.w.s. 154 of the I. T. Act was furnished. Appellant submitted that loan granted to its AE (subsidiary company) should

THE DCIT, CIR-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NIRMA LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals for AYs 2012-

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

Transfer Pricing Officer passed an order u/s. 92CA(5) r.w.s. 154 of the I. T. Act dtd. 18.07.2014 revised the addition on account of benchmarking of loan to Rs. 13,92,104/-. The copy of the order u/s 92CA(5) r.w.s. 154 of the I. T. Act was furnished. Appellant submitted that loan granted to its AE (subsidiary company) should

M/S. NIRMA LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals for AYs 2012-\n13 & 2013-14 filed by the assessee are partly allowed, while the appeal of the assessee\nfor AY 2014-15 is allowed

Transfer Pricing\nOfficer passed an order u/s.92CA(5) r.w.s.154 of the I. T. Act dtd.\n18.07.2014 revised the addition on account of benchmarking of loan to Rs.\n13,92,104/-. The copy of the order u/s 92CA(5) r.w.s.154 of the I. T. Act\nwas furnished. Appellant submitted that loan granted to its AE (subsidiary\ncompany) should be computed

ARVIND LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI PRESENT JURISDICTION THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamblearvind Limited, Dcit Vs. Naroda Road, Nfac, Delhi Ahmedabad-380025 (Dcit, Circle 1(1)(1), [Pan : Aabca 2398 D] Ahmedabad) Arvind Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle 1(1)(1), Naroda Road, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380025 [Pan : Aabca 2398 D]

Transfer Pricing Officer’s order passed u/s 92CA(3) of the Act dated 31.07.2021. During the assessment, the assessee objected to the use of the "General purpose/refinance" filter, arguing that the "primary purpose" of the loan should be considered. The Assessing Officer observed that finding an exact comparable is difficult and thus used similar comparable. The Assessing Officer justified using

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ARVIND LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamblearvind Limited, Dcit Vs. Naroda Road, Nfac, Delhi Ahmedabad-380025 (Dcit, Circle 1(1)(1), [Pan : Aabca 2398 D] Ahmedabad) Arvind Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle 1(1)(1), Naroda Road, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380025 [Pan : Aabca 2398 D]

Transfer Pricing Officer’s order passed u/s 92CA(3) of the Act dated 31.07.2021. During the assessment, the assessee objected to the use of the "General purpose/refinance" filter, arguing that the "primary purpose" of the loan should be considered. The Assessing Officer observed that finding an exact comparable is difficult and thus used similar comparable. The Assessing Officer justified using

TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Transfer Pricing upward adjustment u/s.92CA(1) of the I.T Act as under: (a) Corporate Guarantee to Aes 8,32,291 (b) Capital Infusion to Aes 14,05,927 (c) Interest on Loan to Aes 4,39,625 Total: 26,77,843 10. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(Appeal) erred in confirming exclusion

SOPHOS TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Transfer Pricing Officer for determining Arms’ Length Price of the International Transaction undertaken by the assessee company and the TPO accepted the price at which International Transaction were recorded and no adverse inference was drawn by passing order dated 28-10-2019 under section 92CA(3) of the Act. Following the same, the Ld AO accepted the returned income filed

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2,, BHARUCH vs. M/S. HEUBACH COLOUR PVT. LTD.,, ANKLESHWAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

transfer pricing adjustment made by TPO was Nil. The AO has commented that the assessee has not provided the documentary evidences to prove the services rendered. We have gone through the documentary evidences filed by the assessee before the AO which are placed in the paper book, and we have observed that the assessee has duly provided the copy

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2,, BHARUCH vs. M/S. HEUBACH COLOUR PVT. LTD.,, ANKLESHWAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

transfer pricing adjustment made by TPO was Nil. The AO has commented that the assessee has not provided the documentary evidences to prove the services rendered. We have gone through the documentary evidences filed by the assessee before the AO which are placed in the paper book, and we have observed that the assessee has duly provided the copy

NETAFIM IRRIGATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2020-21 Netafim Irrigation India P.Ltd. Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Plot No.268-270, 271-B Vs Ahmedabad. Gidc, Manjusar, Savli Vadodara Pan : Aaace 4738 J (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri Dhinal Shah, Ar : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/01/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/03/2025

254. 2 1.2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO / Hon'ble DRP has erred in applying turnover filter of 10 times of the tested party's turnover and consequentially rejecting 3 comparable companies from the set of comparable companies selected by the Appellant in the Transfer Pricing Study Report (TPSR

M/S. BODAL CHEMICALS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals being IT(SS)A No

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

transfer other than from P&L, without prejudice to above the Ld. AR further submitted that it is not necessary that the General Reserves are always created out of accumulated profits. General Reserves can be created in many ways including following transactions; general reserves can arise out of revaluation of certain assets due to amalgamation. The Ld. AR relied upon

SHRI MUKESH RASIKLAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-9, NOW CIRCLE-4(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

254 (1) of 1.T. Act (2) by not providing evidence & material used w.r.t. alleged changes (page 6377) (3) by not providing opportunity of being heard (Page 58-62), violating principles of justice as per directions of Hon’ble ITAT's order dt. 8-6-05 & 7-9-05. No such evidence has been filed before Hon’ble Criminal Court/High

SHRI MUKESH RASIKLAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-9, NOW CIRCLE-4(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

254 (1) of 1.T. Act (2) by not providing evidence & material used w.r.t. alleged changes (page 6377) (3) by not providing opportunity of being heard (Page 58-62), violating principles of justice as per directions of Hon’ble ITAT's order dt. 8-6-05 & 7-9-05. No such evidence has been filed before Hon’ble Criminal Court/High

THE VARDHMAN STAMPINGS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

254 (SC), and (ii) ONGC Vs. CIT, 322 ITR 189, that the\nloss was not on account of any forward contract in foreign currecy\nderivatives. Our attention was drawn to page no.5 to 7 wherein the\nassessee had furnished explanation with regard to this claim of loss\nto the AO, reproduced as under:\n\"2. In the above context

THE VARDHMAN STAMPINGS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

254 (SC), and (ii) ONGC Vs. CIT, 322 ITR 189, that the\nloss was not on account of any forward contract in foreign currecy\nderivatives. Our attention was drawn to page no.5 to 7 wherein the\nassessee had furnished explanation with regard to this claim of loss\nto the AO, reproduced as under:\n"2. In the above context

ATMIBEN ALIPTKUMAR DOSHI,,SABARKANTHA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, SK WARD-3, HIMATNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2015-16

254 of IT Act, 1961 which is requested to be quashed. (ii) To drop the addition of Rs.7,54,948/- being accommodation entry u/s.68 of the IT Act, 1961.” Assessment Year: 2015-16 Page 2 of 7 3. The return of income was filed on 07.09.2015 declaring total income of Rs.3,56,370/-. The return was duly processed under Section