HOWDEN SOLYVENT (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

Appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

disallowance of 25% under CUP method which was not permissible. Differing from the view of earlier year, Ld. DRP held that CUP was most appropriate method. The demand raised by AE on the ground enterprises was not based on actual cost incurred by the AE on provision of services on each group enterprises. The actual receipt of services that

INTIMATE FASHIONS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in IT (TP) A No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleit (Tp) A No.48/Chny/2019 It (Tp) A No.54/Chny/2018 & िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2011-12, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Intimate Fashions (India)- V. The Dcit / Jcit, Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Circle-2(2), 517-519, Chennai. Tirupporur Kottamedu High Road, Nandhivaram Village, Guduvancheri-603 202. Kanchipuram District.

Disallowance under Section 80JJAA of the - √ √ √ Act 4. The first issue that came up for our consideration from assessee’s appeal for AYs 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2014-15, TP is adjustment towards payment of agency commission. The facts with regard to impugned dispute are that the assessee had entered into an agency agreement dated 18.03.1999 with M/s.Triumph, and agreed

INTIMATE FASHIONS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,KANCHIPURAM vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in IT (TP) A No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleit (Tp) A No.48/Chny/2019 It (Tp) A No.54/Chny/2018 & िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2011-12, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Intimate Fashions (India)- V. The Dcit / Jcit, Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Circle-2(2), 517-519, Chennai. Tirupporur Kottamedu High Road, Nandhivaram Village, Guduvancheri-603 202. Kanchipuram District.

Disallowance under Section 80JJAA of the - √ √ √ Act 4. The first issue that came up for our consideration from assessee’s appeal for AYs 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2014-15, TP is adjustment towards payment of agency commission. The facts with regard to impugned dispute are that the assessee had entered into an agency agreement dated 18.03.1999 with M/s.Triumph, and agreed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU CIRCLE 1 CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CARBORUNDUM UNIVERSAL LIMITED, CHENNAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./ It(Tp)A Nos.2, 3 & 4/Chny/2025 िनधा@रण वष@ /Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2017-18

method found that arithmetic mean of the rates of bank guarantee was 2.01% but added in the case of the Assessee a conservative figure of 1% of the value of the loans guaranteed. In view of the same, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition of Rs.1.85 crores made by the TPO and adopted by the Assessing Officer. On further appeal

M/S. EID PARRY INDIA LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, LTU-1,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathait(Tp)A. Nos.:105, 106, 107/Chny/2024 & Ita No.3113/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. E.I.D. Parry India Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 234, Dare House, Nsc Vs. Income Tax, Bose Road, Parrys Corner, Large Taxpayer Unit -1, Chennai 600 001. Chennai. [Pan: Aaace-0702-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

TP study an attempt is made to find out the guarantee commission rates charged by Bank which issued Loc/guarantee. The State Bank of India, Chennai charged 1% along with service tax against the assessee for issue of LOC. The same along with 0.5% of Risk may be considered as ALP and CUP is considered as Most Appropriate Method. 7. Based

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU CIRCLE 1 CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. E I D PARRY INDIA LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathait(Tp)A. Nos.:105, 106, 107/Chny/2024 & Ita No.3113/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. E.I.D. Parry India Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 234, Dare House, Nsc Vs. Income Tax, Bose Road, Parrys Corner, Large Taxpayer Unit -1, Chennai 600 001. Chennai. [Pan: Aaace-0702-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

TP study an attempt is made to find out the guarantee commission rates charged by Bank which issued Loc/guarantee. The State Bank of India, Chennai charged 1% along with service tax against the assessee for issue of LOC. The same along with 0.5% of Risk may be considered as ALP and CUP is considered as Most Appropriate Method. 7. Based

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

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

disallow the interest expenditure because it is incurred for the purpose of business. Hence, we allow the interest and direct the AO accordingly. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. Revenue’s Appeal in ITA No.1035/CHNY/2022, AY 2009-10 15. The first issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition

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

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

disallow the interest expenditure because it is incurred for the purpose of business. Hence, we allow the interest and direct the AO accordingly. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. Revenue’s Appeal in ITA No.1035/CHNY/2022, AY 2009-10 15. The first issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition

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

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

disallow the interest expenditure because it is incurred for the purpose of business. Hence, we allow the interest and direct the AO accordingly. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. Revenue’s Appeal in ITA No.1035/CHNY/2022, AY 2009-10 15. The first issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition

NIPPON PAINT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.779/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12

method and Ground No.2.9 is dismissed. 4.0 Ground No.2.10 is related to the comparable of Asian Paints Ltd. The assessee has objected for selecting the Asian Paints as comparable to the appellant, since there was a huge difference in scale of operations. The assessee in TP study selected the four companies as comparables as under: 1) Berger Paints India

REGEN POWERTECH PRIVATE LMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and Department are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

disallowance by way of TP adjustment is not justified’’. In the case of Global Vantedge (P) Ltd vs. DCIT 1 ITR 0326 it was held that ‘’Order of CIT(A) on the point of determination of the arm's length price in respect of the transactions entered into by the assessee with its AE on the basis of average operating

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. REGEN POWERTECH (P) LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and Department are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

disallowance by way of TP adjustment is not justified’’. In the case of Global Vantedge (P) Ltd vs. DCIT 1 ITR 0326 it was held that ‘’Order of CIT(A) on the point of determination of the arm's length price in respect of the transactions entered into by the assessee with its AE on the basis of average operating

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

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

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.

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

THE INDIA CEMENTS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2663/Chny/2025 धििाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Year: 2021-22

disallowance of gratuity and superannuation amounting to Rs.20,45,39,511/- claimed u/s 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by incorrectly applying the due date specified under the relevant welfare Acts. The said amounts represent the employer's contribution, which, as per the provisions of Section 43B(b), is allowable as a deduction if actually paid on or before

NVH INDIA AUTO PARTS PRIVATE LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 4(2), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2773/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Nvh India Auto Parts Private Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income-Tax, B-68, Sipcot Industrial Park, Corporate Circle -4(2), Irungattukottai, Sriperumbadur Nungambakkam, Taluk, Kancheepuram – 602 105. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aaccn-2857-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.08.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2023

TP adjustment of Rs. 3,01,14,249/- to international transactions of the assessee with its AE. The Assessing Officer, had also proposed additions towards disallowance of provision for warranty of Rs. 1,41,29,858/-, on the ground that provision for warranty claim is unascertained liability and there is no scientific basis for provision for warranty expenses. Similarly

CONFERENCECALL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2010-11 & 2012-13 are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 584/Chny/2015 & 529/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2012-13 Conferencecall Services India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Ltd V. Income Tax, Rmz Titanium, No. 135, Corporate Circle -1(2), 1St Floor, Chennai – 34. Old Airport Road, Bangalore – 560 017. [Pan: Aaccc-6574-A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Soumen Adak, Ca & Shri. Ashish Poddar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

TP adjustment as suggested by the TPO and also disallowance of payment made to AE u/s. 40(a)(i) of the Act. The DRP, had also directed the TPO to exclude certain comparables selected by the TPO while making adjustment towards software development services. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer has passed final assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C

CONFERENCECALL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT,

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2010-11 & 2012-13 are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 584/Chny/2015 & 529/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2012-13 Conferencecall Services India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Ltd V. Income Tax, Rmz Titanium, No. 135, Corporate Circle -1(2), 1St Floor, Chennai – 34. Old Airport Road, Bangalore – 560 017. [Pan: Aaccc-6574-A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Soumen Adak, Ca & Shri. Ashish Poddar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

TP adjustment as suggested by the TPO and also disallowance of payment made to AE u/s. 40(a)(i) of the Act. The DRP, had also directed the TPO to exclude certain comparables selected by the TPO while making adjustment towards software development services. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer has passed final assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C

MOS METRO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 4(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manjunatha.G

method for selection of comparables. Here, we agree with the ld.CIT-DR but we noted that there is no discussion by the TPO except the financials of the tunnel digging machine of the assessee the TPO has not discussed the nature of these two companies i.e., KNR Constructions Ltd., and Patel Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., whether they are in tunnel boring