NOVO NORDISK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P.George

92A, 92B, 92C, 92D and 92E, unless the context otherwise requires,— ………… ………… (v) “transaction” includes an arrangement, understanding or action in concert,— (A) whether or not such arrangement, understanding or action is formal or in writing; or (B) whether or not such arrangement, understanding or action is intended to be enforceable by legal proceeding. 59. He laid emphasis on the words

UNITED BREWERIES LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BENGALURU

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

section 92A of the Act; 2.15 The learned AO/TPO has no jurisdiction to question the commercial expediency for the incurrence of the expenditure and thus Rule 10B(1)(a) does not authorize disallowance of any expenditure on the ground that it was not necessary or prudent for the Appellant to have incurred such expenditure; 2.16 The learned AO/TPO has made

UNITED BREWERIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE- 7, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

2). 6.1 The crux of the above grounds is with regard to disallowance of sales promotion expenses. 6.2 After hearing both the parties, we are of the opinion that this issue came for consideration before this Tribunal in assessee’s own case in IT(TP)A No.2532/Bang/2019 cited (supra), wherein the Tribunal held as under: “10. After hearing both

M/S. UNITED BREWERIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

2). 6.1 The crux of the above grounds is with regard to disallowance of sales promotion expenses. 6.2 After hearing both the parties, we are of the opinion that this issue came for consideration before this Tribunal in assessee’s own case in IT(TP)A No.2532/Bang/2019 cited (supra), wherein the Tribunal held as under: “10. After hearing both

M/S. UNITED BREWERIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE-7, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

2). Section 92A(1) lays down the basic rule that in order to be treated as an "associated enterprise in one IT(TP)A No.2532/Bang/2019 United Brewries Ltd., Bangalore Page 15 of 70 enterprise, in relation to another enterprise, means an enterprise which participate, directly or indirectly, or through one or more intermediaries, 'in the management or control or capital

INFOSYS LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ADDL.C.I.T, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

92A of the Act vide order dt.27.6.2008 in which no TP Adjustment to the ALP of the assessee's international transactions was proposed or made. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act vide order dt.31.12.2008, wherein the assessee's income was determined at Rs.351,52,97,339 in view of various addition / disallowances made

M/S. ORIGAMI CELLULO PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 5, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2015-16

92A(2) reported in Form 3CEB, the AO should have referred the matter to the TPO so as to ascertain the ALP of specific domestic transactions with related parties. According to him, the AO failed to follow the CBDT Instruction No.3/16 dated 10.3.2016, which expressly provides for determination of ALP of international transactions as well as specific domestic transactions. However

M/S PAGE INDUSTRIES LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

section 14A read with rule 8D(2)(iii) of Rs.20,51,175/- iii. Disallowance of Rs.74,08,961/- under the provisions of sec.80JJAA of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved by the draft assessment order, the assessee-company filed objections before the Dispute Resolution IT(TP)A No.163/Bang/2015 Page 5 of 24 Panel [DRP] contesting all the additions. It was contended

M/S OBULAPURAM MINING CO., PVT. LTD.,,BELLARY vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri. Sunil Kumar Yadav & Sri. Arun Kumar Garodia

section 92A. 10. DETERMINATION OF ALP: WITHOUT PREJUDICE THAT – a) The authorities should have appreciated that the contractual terms is material to the determination of ALP as per Clause (c) of Rule 10B (2) and therefore, the arms length price (ALP) should be determined by taking only such uncontrolled transactions which also had similar contractual terms, as NMDC and MMTC

M/S PALMER INVESTMENT GROUP LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

disallowance Amount (in Rs.) 1 Re-computation of arm's length price of shares sold 2,62,27,80,021 by the assessee 2 Differential tax on account of difference in rate of tax 96,52,74,468 on capital gains (based on the assessed income) M/s. Palmer Investment Group Ltd. 4. Consequent to the final assessment order total income

M/S UB SPORTS MANAGEMENT OVERSEAS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

disallowance Amount (in Rs.) 1 Re-computation of arm's length price of shares sold 2,62,27,80,021 by the assessee 2 Differential tax on account of difference in rate of tax 96,52,74,468 on capital gains (based on the assessed income) M/s. Palmer Investment Group Ltd. 4. Consequent to the final assessment order total income

APPLIED MATERIALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, ground Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K

Section 92A(2)(a) which provides a limit of 26% of the equity capital carrying voting rights for treating an enterprise as Associated Enterprise. if the limit is reduced further it would only result in eliminating more and more companies, on the other hand if the limit is relaxed then companies with predominantly related party transactions would get included which

M/S. AIRBUS GROUP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

disallowed under section 40(a)(i) of the Act. Against this, assessee is in appeal before us. 3. First ground of appeal is reproduced below: 1. That, orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 1(1)(1), Bengaluru (“Learned AO”) and the Deputy IT(TP)A No.2385/Bang/2019 M/s. Airbus Group India Private Limited, Bangalore Page

M/S TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTORS (P) LTD ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

disallowance is revenue neutral and therefore addition is not called for: GENERAL GROUNDS. 20. The lower authorities have erred in levying a sum of Rs 86,94,71,473/- as interest under section 234B. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, nterest under section 234B is not applicable. Even otherwise, the interest u/s 234B is excessive

HEWLETT PACKARD (INDIA) SOFTWARE OPERATION PRIVATE LIMITED,2016-17 vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.213/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17

disallowed in the said years and allowed a claim towards depreciation. Thus, consequential depreciation of the said software ought to be provided in the year under consideration. 4. Other Matters: 4.1 The learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in initiating penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4.2 The learned AO has erred

M/S. HIMALAYA WELLNESS COMPANY (FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE HIMALAYA DRUG COMPANY),BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(1)(1), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.259/Bang/2022 : Asst.Year 2017-2018 M/S.Himalaya Wellness Company The Deputy Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As The Himalaya Income-Tax, Circle 6(1)(1) V. Bengaluru. Drug Company), Makali, Tumkur Road Bengaluru – 562 162. Pan : Aadft3025B. (Appellant) (Respondent)

92A(2) of the IT Act are not present. 8.8 As regards rejection of the TP study done by the Appellant under TNMM and adoption of CPM as the Most Appropriate Method: 8.9 The Hon’ble DRP is not justified in upholding the action of the Ld. TPO in rejecting the Transfer Pricing study carried out by the Appellant under

M/S. HEWLETT-PACKARD (INDIA) SOFTWARE OPERATION PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE- 3, BANGALORE

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.It(Tp)A No. 2575/Bang/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-16)

92A(2)(a) which provides a limit of 26% of the equity capital carrying voting rights for treating an enterprise as Associated Enterprise. if the limit is reduced further it would only result in eliminating more and more companies, on the other hand if the limit is relaxed then companies with predominantly related party transactions would get included which would

EIT SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act is warranted for non-deduction of tax at source under Section 195 of the Act, without appreciating that provisions of Section 195 of the Act are not applicable to the reimbursement made by the Appellant. l. That the AO erred in holding that income is embedded in the reimbursement without

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2(1) BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. PALMER INVESTMENT GROUP LIMITED, VIRGIN ISLANDS

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.

2) and 142(1) were issued for which the assessee also appeared and filed their submissions with the documents. During the course of the scrutiny proceedings, it was noticed that the assessee had sold 43,76,771 shares of United Spirits Ltd (USL) to Relay BV at Rs. 1,440/- per share and on that basis, the AO had referred