ONMOBILE GLOBAL LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1)(2), BANGALORE
In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 245/BANG/2023[2013-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2013-13
Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 245/Bang/2023 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Onmobile Global Ltd., Tower #1, 94/1C & 94/2, The Deputy Veerasandra Village, Commissioner Attibele Hobli, Of Income Tax, Anekal Taluk, Circle – 5(1)(2), Electronic City Phase – 1, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 100. Pan: Aaaco3900E Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Onmobile Global Ltd., Tower #1, 94/1C & The Deputy 94/2, Commissioner Of Veerasandra Village, Income Tax, Attibele Hobli, Central Circle – 1(2), Anekal Taluk, Bangalore. Vs. Electronic City Phase – 1, Bangalore – 560 100. Pan: Aaaco3900E Appellant Respondent : Shri T. Suryanarayana, Assessee By Senior Advocate Revenue By : Shri D.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr
For Respondent: Shri T. Suryanarayana
Section 271(1)(c)Section 92(3)Section 92C
transfer pricing rules. We direct the Ld.AO/TPO to consider the segments of the assessee under the receipt of business development services from its AE denovo in accordance with law. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee.
Accordingly, ground nos. 5-7 and 9-10 stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Revenue’s appeal
