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

transfer pricing (“TP) order dated 30.10.2019 under section 92CA of the Act and has made the following adjustments: S Particulars Amount (Rs) No A International Transaction with Associated Enterprises (“AE”) 1. Management Fee 6,00,00,000 2. Payment of Royalty 2,55,70,901 B Specified Domestic Transaction 1. Sales promotion expenses paid to United

DELIVERHEALTH SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS NUANCE TRANSCRIPTION SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRC-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuit(Tp)A No. 342/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Deliverhealth Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Nuance Transcription Services India Pvt. Ltd.) The Joint First Floor, Block B, Commissioner Of Salarpuria Aura, Income Tax, Khata No. 434/170, Circle 2(1)(1), Marathahalli –Sarjapur Outer Vs. Bangalore. Ring Road, Kaverappa Layout, Kadubeesanahalli, Bangalore – 560 103. Pan: Aaacf3465F Appellant Respondent

transfer pricing study of the Appellant and using arbitrary filters for benchmarking the international transaction pertaining to ITeS. 4.1 That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO/DRP/TPO have erred in applying the turnover filter with lower limit of INR 1 Crore without appreciating that the Appellant's turnover was INR 233.97 crore, and therefore, ought

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

transfer pricing (“TP) order dated 17.10.2018 under section 92CA of the Act and has made the following adjustments: IT(TP)A No.2532/Bang/2019 United Brewries Ltd., Bangalore Page 2 of 70 S No Particulars Amount (Rs) A International Transaction with Associated Enterprises (“AE”) 1. Management Fee 6,00,00,000 2. Brad promotion expenses paid to Force India

RAAJRATNA ENERGY HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE

section 14A of the Act in the case of PCIT vs. Novell Software\nDevelopment India (P) Ltd reported in (2021) 128 taxmann.com 29 (\nKarnataka). The relevant part of the judgment is as under:\n4. Learned counsel for the revenue fairly submitted that the first substantial question of law\ndoes not arise for consideration. However, with regard to the third substantial

WIPRO LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

sections after application of the ALP, in our view, is the Transfer pricing adjustment contemplated in sec.92 of the Act. 39.21 We have prepared certain illustrations in order to explain above points. They are given below:- There are two situations in which the profits of eligible business are inflated. They are (a) Over invoicing revenue (b) Under invoicing expenses

RAAJRATNA ENERGY HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

Accordingly, this\nground is allowed for statistical purposes

transferred freely.\nHence, the decision in the above case clearly does not apply\nto the facts of our case and the learned assessing officer failed to\ntake this difference into consideration.\n10. CIT Vs. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd 326\nITR 0001\nIn this case, the Hon'ble supreme court finally held that “for\nattracting Sec. 14A, there

YOKOGAWA INDIA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LARGE TAXPAYERS UNIT , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

transfer pricing adjustment made towards Global Sales and Marketing Activity fees ("GSMAF") and Management fees ("MF") [Ground Nos. 6 to 12]; and ad hoc disallowance made under Section 14A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE vs. EYGBS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Waseem Ahmed & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

transfer pricing adjustment made on scientific basis in the computation of income in respect of Gurqaon SEZ unit as same was not hit by proviso to section 92C(4) of the Act. 22. The ITAT Bangalore in case of IBM India Pvt Ltd (59 CCH 260) dated 31 July 2020 , following the decision of Pune Tribunal in case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE vs. EYGBS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Waseem Ahmed & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

transfer pricing adjustment made on scientific basis in the computation of income in respect of Gurqaon SEZ unit as same was not hit by proviso to section 92C(4) of the Act. 22. The ITAT Bangalore in case of IBM India Pvt Ltd (59 CCH 260) dated 31 July 2020 , following the decision of Pune Tribunal in case

PRACTO TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), BENGALURU, BANGALORE

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), SHRI KESHAV DUBEY (Judicial Member)

transferred to AE computed by MRV Krishna & Co. TOTAL 3,487,865,338 3.8 The AO passed a draft assessment order under section 144C(1) of the Act on 30.03.2023, determining the total income of the Assessee at Rs. 340,68,58,962 after incorporating the TP adjustments as above and making certain disallowances under section 14A and section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2, LTU, BENGALURU vs. M/S. ROBERT BOSCH ENGINEERING AND BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

transfer pricing issues having 11 pages, various case laws along with its compilation and contended that the number of employees employed in the year in dispute is far exceeding 10% of the employees as on the last day of the previous year. The ld. AR in support of his contention filed the auditors certificate place on pages

ROBERT BOSCH ENGINEERING AND BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LARGE TAX PAYERS UNIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

transfer pricing issues having 11 pages, various case laws along with its compilation and contended that the number of employees employed in the year in dispute is far exceeding 10% of the employees as on the last day of the previous year. The ld. AR in support of his contention filed the auditors certificate place on pages

GOLDMAN SACHS SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

transfer pricing adjustment at the entity level instead of restricting the adjustment to the cost of international transaction. 2. Disallowance under section 14A

QUEST GLOBAL ENGINEERING SERVICES PRIVATE :LIMITED,BELAGAVI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, BELAGAVI

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuit(Tp)A No.279/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18

Transfer Pricing (TP) document furnished for the A.Y.2017-18, the taxpayer company has entered into the following international transactions with its Associated Enterprises (AEs): International Transactions Particulars Receivables/Received Payables/Paid Method 30806,30,818 TNMM Provision of engineering services 7407,50,417 Provision of backoffice - TNMM support services 3845,35,501 TNMM Availing of engineering services 670,03,866 Availing of back

SHRI. POLLAMREDDY SREEDHAR REDDY,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU-1, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2018-19

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] shall be deemed to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, if in the opinion of the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner,— Pollam Reddy Shreedhar Reddy, Bangalore Page 4 of 16 (a) the order is passed without making

NVIDIA GRAPHICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee s party allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathi. Sr Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. Nvidia Graphics Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, Mahadevpura Village, Central Circle – 2(4), K. R. Puram Hobli, Marathalli Bangalore. Bagmane Goldstone Building, North Tower, Mahadevpura S.O, Bangalore – 560 048. Pan : Aabcn 9200 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Nageshwar Rao, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Neha Sahay, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2024

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) under section 92CA of the Act for AY 2014-15, it may be noted that the TPO has proposed adjustments to the ALP only on account of comparability analysis. It may be pertinent to note that no discussion has been made on the definition of operating cost" i.e which expenses would constitute operating cost

TOYOTA TSUSHO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGAORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmed

transfer pricing study, the comparable companies are selected which are sufficiently comparable with the tested party. In the present case, the company, namely M/s Growtech Limited, is engaged in the manufacturing activity which cannot be compared with the trading activity the assessee as both the companies operate in different segment. Accordingly, we hold that such a comparable cannot be used

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

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

transfer pricing provision and not while allowability of business expense u/s 37(1). It is well known fact that companies use sports event as a platform to advertise their range of products as it has a very high viewership. Any such incurring of expenditure is ostensibly for promotion of business only and hence, no disallowance is called for.\n31. Accordingly

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

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

14A as the authorities below restricted the same to the amount of exempt income earned during the year which is in parity with the ratios laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court and various High Courts consistently followed by this Tribunal. 11. The Ld.AR submitted that Ground nos. 7-12 is in respect of the disallowance made on the digital