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

15,497/- being sponsorship fees paid to ICC 87. In Grounds No. 7 to 7.3 in I.T.A. No. 1044/DEL/2014 for AY 2009- 10, the assessee has challenged the disallowance of INR 3,85,15,497/- being sponsorship fees paid by the assessee to ICC. Our attention was drawn to paras 4 to 4.3 of the final assessment order wherein

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

15,497/- has been made on account of sponsorship fee by the assessee to the ICC on the ground that similar expenditure was disallowed in the earlier years as part of Transfer Pricing Adjustment on account of AMP expenses; and secondly, assessee has been bearing substantial portion of the fees to the ICC for acquiring the sponsorship rights even though

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI vs. SMT. SHEELA PRASANNAKUMAR , CHITRADURGA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

15) of section 155 shall, as far may\nbe. Apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for\nthe purpose of this sub-clause as they apply for valuation of capital\nasset under those sections\".\n5.2 In this case, the AO had reproduced in the assessment order,\nthe detailed objections raised by the appellant during the assessment

NALAPAD PROPERTIES ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3) , BANGALORE

15,745/- and given deduction towards cost of land at\nRs.1,45,44,590/- and computed the business income at\nRs.393,84,71,155/-. On appeal, 1d. CIT(A) observed that transfer\ntook place in the AY 2017-18 as decided by ld. AO. However, while\ndetermining the value of sale consideration, he directed the ld. AO\nto adopt

WEG INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, BMTC BUILDING

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2021-22

Transfer Pricing adjustment to the value of international transactions. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. TPO/Ld. AO/ Hon'ble DRP ought to have excluded following companies from the final set of comparables: i) Portescap India Pvt. Ltd. ii) Rexnord Electronics & Controls Ltd. iii) Premium Transmission Pvt. Ltd. iv) Remi Elektrotechnik

MAVENIR SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuit(Tp)A No. 453/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Mavenir Systems Pvt. Ltd., Building Beach E1 2Nd Floor, The Deputy Manyata Embassy Business Commissioner Of Park, Income Tax, Outer Ring Road Hebbal Kr Circle – 4 (1)(1), Puram Section, Vs. Bangalore. Bengaluru – 560 045. Pan: Aaecm9663N Appellant Respondent : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee By Advocate : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Revenue By Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 05-01-2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 23-03-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 29.04.2022 Passed By The Ld.Dcit, Circle 4(1)(1), Bangalore For A.Y. 2017-18. The Ld.Ar Has Relied On The Specific Grounds Of Appeal Filed Before This Tribunal Which Are As Under:

Section, Vs. Bangalore. Bengaluru – 560 045. PAN: AAECM9663N APPELLANT RESPONDENT : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee by Advocate : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Revenue by CIT DR Date of Hearing : 05-01-2023 Date of Pronouncement : 23-03-2023 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal is filed by assessee against the final assessment order dated 29.04.2022 passed by the Ld.DCIT, Circle

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, BENGALURU vs. ANALOG DEVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, the Cross Objection is dismissed as infructuous

155 (Delhi - Trib.), Applied Material (supra),\nFinastra Software (supra) and Dell International Services India P. Ltd. v.\nJCIT in IT(TP)A No. 659/Bang/2016.\n\n23.7 In view of the above, the Ld. AR submitted that the exclusion of\nPersistent Systems and Solutions Ltd. by the Ld. CIT(A) does not call for\nany interference by this Tribunal and that

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

transfer pricing analysis submitted by the Appellant. 14. The lower authorities have erred in: (i) Adopting a flawed process in issuing notices u/s 133(6) and relying on the information collected without providing the Appellant the complete information or providing an opportunity to cross examine; (ii) Adopting inappropriate filters like one sided turnover filter, persistent loss making, 15% RPT filter

AMD INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BANGALORE

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

transfer pricing analysis submitted by the Appellant. 14. The lower authorities have erred in: (i) Adopting a flawed process in issuing notices u/s 133(6) and relying on the information collected without providing the Appellant the complete information or providing an opportunity to cross examine; (ii) Adopting inappropriate filters like one sided turnover filter, persistent loss making, 15% RPT filter

M/S INFORMATICA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SPECIAL RAGE-3, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2014-15

15 against the assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] dated 29/10/2018 passed by the Page 2 of 18 Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Special Range – 3, Bangalore (the learned AO) determining the total income of the assessee at ₹ 603,863,180 against the returned income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI vs. SRI LINGARAJU GOWDARA MALLIKARJUNAPPA, CHITRADURGA

price than residential land. The other circumstantial factors\npointed out by the appellant were also not considered by the AO. It is\nalso not the case where, having caught, the appellant tried to obtain a\nvaluation report matching the purchase value. The valuation report\nwas part of the materials seized from the search premises and this\nevidence cannot be refuted

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

15,497/- has been made on account of sponsorship fee by the assessee to the ICC on the ground that similar expenditure was disallowed in the earlier years as part of Transfer Pricing Adjustment on account of AMP expenses; and secondly, assessee has been bearing substantial portion of the fees to the ICC for acquiring the sponsorship rights even though

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

15,497/- has been made on account of sponsorship fee by the assessee to the ICC on the ground that similar expenditure was disallowed in the earlier years as part of Transfer Pricing Adjustment on account of AMP expenses; and secondly, assessee has been bearing substantial portion of the fees to the ICC for acquiring the sponsorship rights even though

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. ANUSHKA REALTY INC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

155 48,22,26,864 2018-19 5,73,23,86,770 1,69,39,20,291 97.92 1,65,86,86,748 50,75,09,000 1,15

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. ANUSHKA REALTY INC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

155 48,22,26,864 2018-19 5,73,23,86,770 1,69,39,20,291 97.92 1,65,86,86,748 50,75,09,000 1,15

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. ANUSHKA REALTY INC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

155 48,22,26,864 2018-19 5,73,23,86,770 1,69,39,20,291 97.92 1,65,86,86,748 50,75,09,000 1,15

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. ANUSHKA REALTY INC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

155 48,22,26,864 2018-19 5,73,23,86,770 1,69,39,20,291 97.92 1,65,86,86,748 50,75,09,000 1,15

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S ANUSHKA ESTATES, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

155 48,22,26,864 2018-19 5,73,23,86,770 1,69,39,20,291 97.92 1,65,86,86,748 50,75,09,000 1,15