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

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

Transfer of Shares in Tax Havens (like in the case of Vodafone etc.), if based on relevant facts, such substantial questions of law could be raised before the High Court under Section 260-A of the Act, the Courts could have embarked upon such exercise of framing and answering such substantial question of law. On the other hand, the appeals

ACER INDIA PVT LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the grounds relating to T

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

section 92C, the most appropriate method shall be the method which is best suited to the facts and circumstances of each particular international transaction, and which provides the most reliable measure of an arm's length in relation to the international transaction." Sub-rule (2) of Rule 10C lists certain factors which should be taken into account in selecting

M/S. BORQS SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

Transfer of Shares in Tax Havens (like in the case of Vodafone etc.), if based on relevant facts, such substantial questions of law could be raised before the High Court under Section 260-A of the Act, the Courts could have embarked upon such exercise of framing and answering such substantial question of law. On the other hand, the appeals

SOFTLAYER TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

transfer pricing regulations in harmony, the adjustments should be made on the tested party.” “27. We are of the view that it would be just and appropriate to set aside this issue to the AO/TPO by directing the assessee to furnish required details and in the event of the assessee not being in a position to get the required details

M/S. ACER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 144C(13) gives extension of further period of one month from the date of receipt of direction from the DRP. In view of the above, the date of receipt of direction of DRP by the Assessing Officer becomes crucial......” 8. We notice that various benches of Tribunal are taking the view that the provisions of sec.144C(13) give extension

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S EYGBS INDIA PVT LTD , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri G Manjunathaassessment Year: 2014-15

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

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

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

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No.252/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Mindteck India Ltd., Vs. Dcit, A.M.R. Tech Park, Block 1, 3Rd Floor, Circle – 4(1)(1), No.664, 23/24, Hosur Main Road, Begur, Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560 068. Pan : Aaach 1072 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Padam Chand Khincha, Ca Revenue By : Shri. V. S. Chakrapani, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.06.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan

Transfer of Shares in Tax Havens (like in the case of Vodafone etc.), if based on relevant facts, such substantial questions of law could be raised before the High Court under Section 260-A of the Act, the Courts could have embarked upon such exercise of framing and answering such substantial IT(TP)A No.252/Bang/2021 Page 18 of 33 question

SAMI-SABINSA GROUP LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

260/- should not be made as suggested by the TPO vide order u/s 92CA(3) of the I.T.Act. In response to said notice, assessee vide letter dated 10/02/2021 has submitted its submission . Relevant portion as under:- " ……. The TPO has proposed a Transfer Pricing adjustment of of Rs.20.36 crores. We do not agree to this adjustment proposed by the TPO since

GLOBAL E-BUSINESS OPERATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(3)(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

260 (Pune - Trib) has held that the said concern cannot be accepted as comparable. The Tribunal in Aptara Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (supra) held as under:— "14. We find that the Tribunal in assessee's own case in assessment year 2008-09 in ITA No.2235/PN/2012, order dated 02.02.2015 had held that the said concern could not be considered

ANSR GLOBAL CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathyit(Tp)A No.225/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Ansr Global Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Acit, Vs. Ground Floor, Block L1, Circle – 1(1)(1), Manyata Embassy Business Park, Bengaluru. Sez, Outer Ring Road, Nagwara, Bengaluru-560 045. Pan : Aaecn 7296 E Appellant Respondent

Transfer of Shares in Tax Havens (like in the case of Vodafone etc.), if based on relevant facts, such substantial questions of law could be raised before the High Court under Section 260-A of the Act, the Courts could have embarked upon such exercise of framing and answering such substantial question of law. On the other hand, the appeals

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

In the result, the appeal by the AO is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

transfer pricing adjustment made on scientific basis in the computation of income in respect of Gurgaon 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

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

260 ITR 491\n(HC Bombay)\nc) Advance Ruling in the case of Jasbir Singh Sarkaria (294\nITR 196) (AAR) New Delhi.\n5.5 He submitted that on Parity of reasoning mentioned in the\nabove cases, the transfer of land arose in pursuance of JDA dated\n17-01-2008 relevant

M/S. METRICSTREAM INFOTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed as indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No.2347/Bang/2019 Assessment Year : 2015 – 16

transfer pricing officer under section 92CA of the Act. 3. Upon receipt of reference, Ld.TPO called for economic details of international transaction entered into by assessee with its associated enterprise in form 3 CEB. From the details filed Page 6 of 36 IT(TP)A No.2347/Bang/2019 A. Y : 2015 – 16 Ld.TPO observed that assessee had following transaction with its associated

STERLING COMMERCE PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result the appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

transfer pricing provisions to include an arrangement, understanding or action in concert whether or not it is formal or in writing or whether or not it is intended to be enforceable by legal proceeding. There is no reference to any transaction having necessarily including profit element or IT(TP)A No.1497/Bang/2010 Page 24 of 37 mark

M/S SALESFORCE.COM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly these ground raised by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No.3286/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15

transfer pricing officer to determine arm’s length price of international transaction entered by the assessee with its AE. Page 5 of 33 IT(TP)A No.3286/Bang/2018 3. Upon receipt of the reference under section 92CA, the Ld.TPO called upon assessee to furnish economic details of international transactions entered by assessee. The Ld.TPO from the details filed observed that

ETISALAT SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

Transfer of Shares in Tax Havens (like in the case of Vodafone etc.), if based on relevant facts, such substantial questions of law could be raised before the High Court under section 260-A of the Act, the Courts could have embarked upon such exercise of framing and answering such substantial question of law. On the other hand, the appeals

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

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