M/S. TBEA SHENYANG TRASFORMER GROPUP COMPANY LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INT. TAX.,, VADODARA

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 581/Ahd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बनाम/ M/S. Tbea Shenyang Deputy Commissioner Of Transformer Group Income Tax Vs. Company Limited International Taxation, National Highway No.-8, Vadodara Villae : Miyagam, Karja, Vadodara, Gujarat - 390007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadct4557F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Arpit Jain, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit. Dr 24/04/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 22/07/2025 O R D E R Per Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Am:

transfer pricing provisions contained in Chapter-X of the IT Act 61. 9.16 The Indian TP regulations call for selecting a suitable method

ALTERA DIGITAL HEALTH (INDIA) LLP (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ALLSCRIPTS (INDIA) LLP),VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, Ground Number 11 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

TP study report be accepted. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. AO/Ld. TPO, following the directions of Ld. DRP, has erred in selecting functionally dissimilar companies and excluding functionally similar companies, In doing so, the Ld. AO/ Ld. TPO/ Ld. DRP have erred in disregarding Appellant's submission with respect

MILACRON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2021-22 Milacron India Pvt.Ltd. The Dcit, Cir.2(1)(1) Plot No.93/2 & 91/4 Vs Ahmedabad. Phase-1,Gidc Vatva, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aabcc 0881 D

TP) risk parameter. 3. During assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) made a reference under section 92CA(1) of the Act to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for determination of the Arm’s Length Price (ALP) of the international transactions reported in Form 3CEB. The TPO, vide order dated 18.10.2023 passed under section 92CA(3), proposed an upward adjustment

SCHAEFFLER INDIA LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.),VADODARA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2) NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and Department’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Transfer Pricing Adjustment in ITA Nos. 133 to 137/Ahd/2023 & ITA Nos. 147 to 150/Ahd/2023 Schaeffler India Ltd.(Earlier known as Fag Bearings India Ltd.) vs. ACIT Asst. Years –2010-11 to 2014-15 & 2010-11 to 2013-14 respect of aforesaid services and accepted the payment of Management Fees to be at Arm’s Length Price. Further, we also observe

SCHAEFFLER INDIA LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.),VADODARA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2) NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and Department’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Transfer Pricing Adjustment in ITA Nos. 133 to 137/Ahd/2023 & ITA Nos. 147 to 150/Ahd/2023 Schaeffler India Ltd.(Earlier known as Fag Bearings India Ltd.) vs. ACIT Asst. Years –2010-11 to 2014-15 & 2010-11 to 2013-14 respect of aforesaid services and accepted the payment of Management Fees to be at Arm’s Length Price. Further, we also observe

SCHAEFFLER INDIA LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.),VADODARA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2) NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and Department’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Transfer Pricing Adjustment in ITA Nos. 133 to 137/Ahd/2023 & ITA Nos. 147 to 150/Ahd/2023 Schaeffler India Ltd.(Earlier known as Fag Bearings India Ltd.) vs. ACIT Asst. Years –2010-11 to 2014-15 & 2010-11 to 2013-14 respect of aforesaid services and accepted the payment of Management Fees to be at Arm’s Length Price. Further, we also observe

SCHAEFFLER INDIA LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.),VADODARA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2) NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and Department’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Transfer Pricing Adjustment in ITA Nos. 133 to 137/Ahd/2023 & ITA Nos. 147 to 150/Ahd/2023 Schaeffler India Ltd.(Earlier known as Fag Bearings India Ltd.) vs. ACIT Asst. Years –2010-11 to 2014-15 & 2010-11 to 2013-14 respect of aforesaid services and accepted the payment of Management Fees to be at Arm’s Length Price. Further, we also observe

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. SCHAEFFLER INDIA LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and Department’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Transfer Pricing Adjustment in ITA Nos. 133 to 137/Ahd/2023 & ITA Nos. 147 to 150/Ahd/2023 Schaeffler India Ltd.(Earlier known as Fag Bearings India Ltd.) vs. ACIT Asst. Years –2010-11 to 2014-15 & 2010-11 to 2013-14 respect of aforesaid services and accepted the payment of Management Fees to be at Arm’s Length Price. Further, we also observe

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. SCHAEFFLER INDIA LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and Department’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Transfer Pricing Adjustment in ITA Nos. 133 to 137/Ahd/2023 & ITA Nos. 147 to 150/Ahd/2023 Schaeffler India Ltd.(Earlier known as Fag Bearings India Ltd.) vs. ACIT Asst. Years –2010-11 to 2014-15 & 2010-11 to 2013-14 respect of aforesaid services and accepted the payment of Management Fees to be at Arm’s Length Price. Further, we also observe

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. SCHAEFFLER INDIA LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and Department’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Transfer Pricing Adjustment in ITA Nos. 133 to 137/Ahd/2023 & ITA Nos. 147 to 150/Ahd/2023 Schaeffler India Ltd.(Earlier known as Fag Bearings India Ltd.) vs. ACIT Asst. Years –2010-11 to 2014-15 & 2010-11 to 2013-14 respect of aforesaid services and accepted the payment of Management Fees to be at Arm’s Length Price. Further, we also observe

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. SCHAEFFLER INDIA LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and Department’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Transfer Pricing Adjustment in ITA Nos. 133 to 137/Ahd/2023 & ITA Nos. 147 to 150/Ahd/2023 Schaeffler India Ltd.(Earlier known as Fag Bearings India Ltd.) vs. ACIT Asst. Years –2010-11 to 2014-15 & 2010-11 to 2013-14 respect of aforesaid services and accepted the payment of Management Fees to be at Arm’s Length Price. Further, we also observe

SCHAEFFLER INDIA LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.),VADODARA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2) NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and Department’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Transfer Pricing Adjustment in ITA Nos. 133 to 137/Ahd/2023 & ITA Nos. 147 to 150/Ahd/2023 Schaeffler India Ltd.(Earlier known as Fag Bearings India Ltd.) vs. ACIT Asst. Years –2010-11 to 2014-15 & 2010-11 to 2013-14 respect of aforesaid services and accepted the payment of Management Fees to be at Arm’s Length Price. Further, we also observe

SCHAEFFLER INDIA LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS INA BEARING INDIA PVT. LTD.),VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CICLE-1(1)(2) NOW DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO), made an upward\nadjustment of Rs. 17,15,40,000/-. This included Rs. 12,45,49,000/-\nrelating to manufacturing business and Rs. 4,69,91,000/- to the distribution\nsegment. Based on the TPO's order, the same amount was added to the\nassessee's returned income, and penalty proceedings under section\n271

BUNDY INDIA LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT., CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, Ground Number 6 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1403/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bundy India Limited The Dy.Cit बनाम/ Plot No.2, Circle-1(1) V/S. Gidc Industrial Estate, Baroda Makarpura Vadodaria - 390 010 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaacb 3039 M (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate Revenue By : Shree Veerbadram Vislavath, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 31/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/10/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm:

methodical search process undertaken by the assessee and in arbitrarily rejecting the comparables selected by it. It was submitted that the amount of management charges disallowed by the TPO/CIT(A) had already been deducted from the Bundy India Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst. Year : 2009-10 operating cost base while computing the operating margins of the manufacturing segment, and after such

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1) (1) AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR AHMEDABAD vs. INDUCTOTHERM (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

Appeal are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

TP) risk parameters, as the assessee had international transactions with its Associated Enterprises (AEs) amounting to Rs.76,89,45,119/-. Accordingly, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 22.08.2017. During the course of assessment, the case was referred to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) under Section 92CA(1) of the Act for determining

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

transfer pricing legislation does not support the plea of the assessee. Learned counsel has not been able to point out any specific legal provision enabling such a corresponding deduction or demonstrate, or even remotely suggest, the line of demarcation as visualized by the learned counsel. As regards the reference to second proviso to Section 92C(4) made by the learned

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

transfer pricing legislation does not support the plea of the assessee. Learned counsel has not been able to point out any specific legal provision enabling such a corresponding deduction or demonstrate, or even remotely suggest, the line of demarcation as visualized by the learned counsel. As regards the reference to second proviso to Section 92C(4) made by the learned

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

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Axis Bank Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Opp. Income-Tax, Samartheshwar Temple, Nr. Law Circle 1(1)(1), Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380006 Pan : Aaacu 2414 K अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2023/03.04.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 10.04.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee-Appellant Has Challenged Correctness Of The Order Dated 28Th July, 2022 Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act” For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. 2. Ground No.1 Raised By The Assessee Reads As Under:- “1. Disallowance In Respect Of Annual Technical Fees (Tax Effect - Rs. 16,84,276) 1.1 The Learned Drp Has Erred In Upholding Addition Made By Ao In Respect Of Treating Annual Technical Services (Ats) Fees Paid To Infosys Limited To The Extent Of Rs. 48.66 Lacs As Prior Period Expense. 1.2. It Is Submitted That The Expenditure Relates To Amount Payable To Infosys & No Part Of The Amount Was Claimed As Expenditure At Any Time In The 2 Axis Bank Limited Vs. Acit Ay : 2018-19

TP adjustment (Tax effect - Rs. 25,59,032) 6.1 The learned DRP has erred in partially agreeing with TPO in making transfer pricing adjustment of Rs.73,94,337 by rejecting the benchmark conducted by the Bank using Other Method