BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

117 results for “TDS”+ TP Methodclear

Sorted by relevance

Bangalore345Mumbai342Delhi307Chennai117Kolkata52Hyderabad34Ahmedabad22Pune20Chandigarh14Jaipur6Karnataka4Rajkot4Visakhapatnam3Indore3Cuttack2Kerala1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)66Addition to Income47Disallowance42Section 14733Transfer Pricing31Deduction27Section 14826Section 92C23TDS22Section 14A

GAMESA RENEWABLE PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1420/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri B.Ramakrishnan, FCA &For Respondent: Smt. Vijayalakshmi, CIT,D.R
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(5)

methods prescribed under the law. A similar view has been taken in ‘Sona Okegawa Precision Forgings Ltd.’ (supra) and in ‘KHS Machinery Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO’, 53 SOT 100 (Ahm) (URO). 35. It is, thus, seen that the royalty payment @ 3% by the assessee is at arm’s length. The Technical Collaboration Agreement stands approved by the Government of India

GAMESA RENEWABLE PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

Showing 1–20 of 117 · Page 1 of 6

21
Section 144C(5)19
Comparables/TP19

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

ITA 376/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri B.Ramakrishnan, FCA &For Respondent: Smt. Vijayalakshmi, CIT,D.R
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(5)

methods prescribed under the law. A similar view has been taken in ‘Sona Okegawa Precision Forgings Ltd.’ (supra) and in ‘KHS Machinery Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO’, 53 SOT 100 (Ahm) (URO). 35. It is, thus, seen that the royalty payment @ 3% by the assessee is at arm’s length. The Technical Collaboration Agreement stands approved by the Government of India

EVERSENDAI CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2084/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2084/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S.Eversendai Construction- V. The Dy. Commissioner- Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, Plot No.1 & 2, The Lords, Corporate Circle-2(1), Block-1, 5Th Floor, Chennai. Thiru-Vi-Ka Industrial Estate, Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Ekkaduthangal, Guindy, Chennai.

For Appellant: Mr.S.P.Chidambaram, AdvFor Respondent: Dr.S.Palanikumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

Method. (Page 6 of TP documentation) 7. EPC Segment Erection, Testing & Commissioning Segment: The assessee company has identified 6 companies as comparable companies by adopting certain search criteria (Page 34 of the documentation) with filters like. (i) Sufficient financial data not available (ii) Ceased business operations or currently inactive (iii) Sick companies or companies with negative net worth (iv) Lack

LITE-ON MOBILE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 478/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3194 & 478/Chny/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2013-14 & 2012-13) M/S. Lite-On Mobile India Pvt.Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Nokia Telecom Special Economic Zone, Income Tax, Plot No.1A, Sipcot Industrial Park, Corporate Circle-4(1) Phase-Iii Chennai-Bangalore Highway, Chennai-600 034. Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram Dist. Pin- 602 105. Pan: Aadcp 9246K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. B.Jayaraghavan, CIT
Section 92CSection 92C(3)

TP in accordance with section 92C of the Act read with Rule10B of the Income- tax Rules, 1962 (“the Rules”) and the relevant OECD guidelines; • without adopting one of the mandatory methods prescribed for determination of ALP under section 92C of the Act read with Rule 10B of the Rules; • without considering several judicial precedents which have held that

LITE-ON MOBILE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 4(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 3194/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3194 & 478/Chny/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2013-14 & 2012-13) M/S. Lite-On Mobile India Pvt.Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Nokia Telecom Special Economic Zone, Income Tax, Plot No.1A, Sipcot Industrial Park, Corporate Circle-4(1) Phase-Iii Chennai-Bangalore Highway, Chennai-600 034. Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram Dist. Pin- 602 105. Pan: Aadcp 9246K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. B.Jayaraghavan, CIT
Section 92CSection 92C(3)

TP in accordance with section 92C of the Act read with Rule10B of the Income- tax Rules, 1962 (“the Rules”) and the relevant OECD guidelines; • without adopting one of the mandatory methods prescribed for determination of ALP under section 92C of the Act read with Rule 10B of the Rules; • without considering several judicial precedents which have held that

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. INDIAN ADDITIVES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1037/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.9, 10 & 11/Chny/2018 िनधा)रण वष) /Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Sudharsan, C.A -For Respondent: Dr. S. Palanikumar, CIT
Section 32(1)Section 40aSection 43B

method. The assessee raised their objection for comparing M/s. Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. as comparable on the ground that M/s. Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. has a better backward integration system, whereas the assessee company does not possess the manufacturing facility for making zinc. Further, the assessee has entered into subcontracting agreement with United Prosperous Ltd. for making Zinc. Therefore

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. INDIAN ADDITIVES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1036/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.9, 10 & 11/Chny/2018 िनधा)रण वष) /Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Sudharsan, C.A -For Respondent: Dr. S. Palanikumar, CIT
Section 32(1)Section 40aSection 43B

method. The assessee raised their objection for comparing M/s. Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. as comparable on the ground that M/s. Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. has a better backward integration system, whereas the assessee company does not possess the manufacturing facility for making zinc. Further, the assessee has entered into subcontracting agreement with United Prosperous Ltd. for making Zinc. Therefore

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. INDIAN ADDITIVES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1035/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.9, 10 & 11/Chny/2018 िनधा)रण वष) /Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Sudharsan, C.A -For Respondent: Dr. S. Palanikumar, CIT
Section 32(1)Section 40aSection 43B

method. The assessee raised their objection for comparing M/s. Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. as comparable on the ground that M/s. Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. has a better backward integration system, whereas the assessee company does not possess the manufacturing facility for making zinc. Further, the assessee has entered into subcontracting agreement with United Prosperous Ltd. for making Zinc. Therefore

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. INDIAN ADDITIVES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1034/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.9, 10 & 11/Chny/2018 िनधा)रण वष) /Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Sudharsan, C.A -For Respondent: Dr. S. Palanikumar, CIT
Section 32(1)Section 40aSection 43B

method. The assessee raised their objection for comparing M/s. Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. as comparable on the ground that M/s. Lubrizol India Pvt. Ltd. has a better backward integration system, whereas the assessee company does not possess the manufacturing facility for making zinc. Further, the assessee has entered into subcontracting agreement with United Prosperous Ltd. for making Zinc. Therefore

HOSPIRA HEALTHCARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

ITA 469/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.469/Chny/2017 िनधा<रण वष< /Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Hospira Healthcare India The Dy. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income Tax, Sri-Nivas, New No.86 (Old No.89), Corporate Circle-2(2), Gn Chetty Road, T Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan: Aaabco 2190F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Sriram Seshadri, C.A Jkथ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Jagadish, A.M : Aforesaid Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Assessment Order Passed By The Dcit, Corporate Circle-2(2), Chennai U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012-13, In Pursuance Of The Directions Issued By The Dispute Resolution Panel, Bengalore (Hereinafter ‘Drp’) Vide Directions Dated 09.11.2016. :- 2 -:

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, C.A JKFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143(3)

TDS”) amounting to INR 1,15,82,340. 4. Ground 4 – Erroneous rejection of CUP as the most appropriate method for sale of goods by Hospira India 4.1. That the Ld. TPO and Hon’ble DRP erred in failing to adopt a consistent TP

M/S. VESTAS TECHNOLOGY R&D CHENNAI PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3081/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3081/Chny/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-2013) M/S Vestas Technology R&D Vs Acit, Corporate Circle-3(2), Chennai Private Limited, Chennai Block A, 8Th Floor, Tecci Park No.173, Rajiv Gandhi Road, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Shollinganallur, Chennai Pan No. : Aaccv 4768 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Darpan Kirpalani, Advocate राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. S.Palanikumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Acit, Corporate Circle-3(2), Chennai, Dated 28.09.2016 For The Assessment Year 2012-2013, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - 1. Ground No.1 1.1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai ("Ld. Ao"), The Ld. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai ("Ld. Tpo") & The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel ("Ld. Drp"), Erred In Enhancing The Income Of The Appellant By Inr 79,265,132 On Account Of Interest At The Rate Of 21% On Receivables Purportedly Due To The Appellant From Its Associated Enterprise ("Ae") , Without Granting Working Capital Adjustment. 1.2. In This Regard, The Order Of The Ld. Ao To The Extent Prejudicial To The Appellant Is Bad In Law & Is Liable To Be Quashed.

For Appellant: Darpan Kirpalani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. S.Palanikumar, CIT
Section 92C

method for determining the Arms Length Price of the transactions with its Associated Enterprises and has taken operating profit to operating cost as the profit level indicator for its operations. The assessee in its TP study report identified 14 comparables to bench mark its international transaction with the AE. The weighted average margin on cost of the comparables was shown

M/S. ABAN OFFSHORE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCITCORPORATE CIRCLE1(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 798/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.: 21/Chny/2022 & 40/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Tpo Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 797 & 798/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2757/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1672/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of V. 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Assessee By Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.11.2023

For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

method followed by the assessee being based on 16,61,77,507/ guidance (Accounting Standards) issued by the ICAI, is very scientific, approved and considered very aspect of the transaction and is being followed on consistent basis. 15. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated the fact Rs. that the exchange difference has been accounted

M/S ABAN OFFSHORE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CORPORATE CIRCLE, CHENNAI

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

ITA 797/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.: 21/Chny/2022 & 40/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Tpo Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 797 & 798/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2757/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1672/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of V. 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Assessee By Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.11.2023

For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

method followed by the assessee being based on 16,61,77,507/ guidance (Accounting Standards) issued by the ICAI, is very scientific, approved and considered very aspect of the transaction and is being followed on consistent basis. 15. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated the fact Rs. that the exchange difference has been accounted

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. ABAN OFFSHORE LTD., CHENNAI

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

ITA 1672/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.: 21/Chny/2022 & 40/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Tpo Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 797 & 798/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2757/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1672/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of V. 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Assessee By Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.11.2023

For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

method followed by the assessee being based on 16,61,77,507/ guidance (Accounting Standards) issued by the ICAI, is very scientific, approved and considered very aspect of the transaction and is being followed on consistent basis. 15. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated the fact Rs. that the exchange difference has been accounted

ABAN OFFSHORE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2757/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.: 21/Chny/2022 & 40/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Tpo Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 797 & 798/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2757/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1672/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of V. 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Assessee By Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.11.2023

For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

method followed by the assessee being based on 16,61,77,507/ guidance (Accounting Standards) issued by the ICAI, is very scientific, approved and considered very aspect of the transaction and is being followed on consistent basis. 15. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated the fact Rs. that the exchange difference has been accounted

TRIMEX INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-IV(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 993/CHNY/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Guduri, JCIT
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

TP adjustment proposed by TPO and added by CIT(A). Aggrieved, Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 18. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstance of the case. We noted that apart from the above difference pointed out by CIT(A) in his order that the single transaction adopted by TPO for comparing

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 (3), CHENNAI vs. TRIMEX INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1035/CHNY/2022[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Guduri, JCIT
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

TP adjustment proposed by TPO and added by CIT(A). Aggrieved, Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 18. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstance of the case. We noted that apart from the above difference pointed out by CIT(A) in his order that the single transaction adopted by TPO for comparing

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 (3), CHENNAI vs. TRIMEX INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1120/CHNY/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Guduri, JCIT
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

TP adjustment proposed by TPO and added by CIT(A). Aggrieved, Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 18. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstance of the case. We noted that apart from the above difference pointed out by CIT(A) in his order that the single transaction adopted by TPO for comparing

DONG-A INDIA AUTOMOTIVE PVT LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD 1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee’s in ITA No

ITA 360/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 585/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ls Automotive India Private Limited Assistant Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Daesung V. Income Tax (Osd), Electric India Pvt Ltd) Corporate Range 1, Room No. 603, 6Th Floor, No. 118, Padur Village, Thiruvelangadu Post, Wanaparthy Block, Kunnavalam V.O. No. 121, Aayakarbhavan, Thiruvallur – 631 210. Mahatma Gandhi Road, [Pan: Aakcs-1901-R] Nungamabakkam, Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 2159/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Komos Automotive India Pvt Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax, B-10/1, Sipcot Industrial Corporate Circle 4(2), 4Th Floor, Main Building, Development Centre, Oragadam, Vaippur-A Vilalge, No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Sriperumbudurtaluk, Road, Nungamabakkam, Kanchipuramdist – 602 105. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aacck-8859-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./It(Tp)A No.: 40/Chny/2019 &

Section 115JSection 40

TDS, re-computation of book profit u/s. 115JB of the Act by making addition towards TP Adjustment as suggested by the TPO and ground relating to set off of brought forward losses. We have identified the issues from various grounds of appeal filed by the assessee’s. Therefore, we deem it not necessary to reproduce grounds of appeal filed

ACIT (OSD) CORPORATE RANGE 1, CHENNAI vs. DONG A INDIA AUTOMOTIVE PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee’s in ITA No

ITA 1365/CHNY/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 585/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ls Automotive India Private Limited Assistant Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Daesung V. Income Tax (Osd), Electric India Pvt Ltd) Corporate Range 1, Room No. 603, 6Th Floor, No. 118, Padur Village, Thiruvelangadu Post, Wanaparthy Block, Kunnavalam V.O. No. 121, Aayakarbhavan, Thiruvallur – 631 210. Mahatma Gandhi Road, [Pan: Aakcs-1901-R] Nungamabakkam, Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 2159/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Komos Automotive India Pvt Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax, B-10/1, Sipcot Industrial Corporate Circle 4(2), 4Th Floor, Main Building, Development Centre, Oragadam, Vaippur-A Vilalge, No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Sriperumbudurtaluk, Road, Nungamabakkam, Kanchipuramdist – 602 105. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aacck-8859-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./It(Tp)A No.: 40/Chny/2019 &

Section 115JSection 40

TDS, re-computation of book profit u/s. 115JB of the Act by making addition towards TP Adjustment as suggested by the TPO and ground relating to set off of brought forward losses. We have identified the issues from various grounds of appeal filed by the assessee’s. Therefore, we deem it not necessary to reproduce grounds of appeal filed