M/S. AMBATTUR DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

transfer of going concern and the profits will be computed\nu/s.50B as a concern as a whole and not on the basis of profits on individual\nassets. In such cases the aggregate value of the undertaking is determined,\nand the Purchaser allocates the total price of the undertaking among the various\nassets of the undertaking. This allocation of purchase price

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

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 -:

transfer pricing provisions rather than making these provisions unworkable. That meaning had to be a dominant influence which leads to de facto control over the other enterprise rather than an influence simplictor. If we are to adopt literal meaning of influence, as has been adopted by the authorities below, all the transactions on negotiated prices will

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT-1, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrimanjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.269/Chny/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S.Cognizant Technology- The Asst. Commissioner- Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, 5/535, Okkiam, Thoriapakkam, Large Taxpayer Unit-1, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai-600 096. [Pan:Aaacd 3312 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Counsel For Shri N.V. Balaji, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri R.Shankaranarayanan, Additional Solicitor – General Of India For Shri A.P.Srinivas, Sr. Standing Counsel : सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing 03.07.2023 घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023

transfer of shares and not dividend. RBI intimation made by the assessee is for _FEMA purposes and not for Income tax Act purposes. Therefore, RBI intimation made by the assessee cannot govern or determine the tax liability under the Income tax Act. Hence, reliance cannot be placed on RBI intimation for income tax liability. The impugned transaction of 'purchase

DCIT , CORPORATE RANGE - 1 (1), CHENNAI vs. M/S ASPIRE SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit/Jcit(Osd), M/S. Aspire Systems India Corporate Circle -1(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. Old No. 4, New No. 7, Ii Trust Link Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aacca-4543-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 39 & 40/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

195 of the Act. The relevant findings of the Assessing Officer are as under: “5.2.3 The submission of the assessee has been considered carefully and he same is not accepted for the following reasons. :-7-: ITA. Nos: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 39, 40, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was required to produce a copy

JCIT(OSD),CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(10, CHENNAI vs. ASPIRE SYSTEMS INDIALTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit/Jcit(Osd), M/S. Aspire Systems India Corporate Circle -1(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. Old No. 4, New No. 7, Ii Trust Link Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aacca-4543-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 39 & 40/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

195 of the Act. The relevant findings of the Assessing Officer are as under: “5.2.3 The submission of the assessee has been considered carefully and he same is not accepted for the following reasons. :-7-: ITA. Nos: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 39, 40, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was required to produce a copy

DCIT , CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1 (1), CHENNAI vs. M/S ASPIRE SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit/Jcit(Osd), M/S. Aspire Systems India Corporate Circle -1(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. Old No. 4, New No. 7, Ii Trust Link Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aacca-4543-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 39 & 40/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

195 of the Act. The relevant findings of the Assessing Officer are as under: “5.2.3 The submission of the assessee has been considered carefully and he same is not accepted for the following reasons. :-7-: ITA. Nos: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 39, 40, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was required to produce a copy

DCIT , CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1 (1), CHENNAI vs. M/S ASPIRE SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit/Jcit(Osd), M/S. Aspire Systems India Corporate Circle -1(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. Old No. 4, New No. 7, Ii Trust Link Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aacca-4543-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 39 & 40/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

195 of the Act. The relevant findings of the Assessing Officer are as under: “5.2.3 The submission of the assessee has been considered carefully and he same is not accepted for the following reasons. :-7-: ITA. Nos: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 39, 40, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was required to produce a copy

DCIT , CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1 (1), CHENNAI vs. M/S ASPIRE SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit/Jcit(Osd), M/S. Aspire Systems India Corporate Circle -1(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. Old No. 4, New No. 7, Ii Trust Link Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aacca-4543-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 39 & 40/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

195 of the Act. The relevant findings of the Assessing Officer are as under: “5.2.3 The submission of the assessee has been considered carefully and he same is not accepted for the following reasons. :-7-: ITA. Nos: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 39, 40, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was required to produce a copy

M/S ASPIRE SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT , CORPORATE RANGE - 1 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit/Jcit(Osd), M/S. Aspire Systems India Corporate Circle -1(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. Old No. 4, New No. 7, Ii Trust Link Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aacca-4543-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 39 & 40/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

195 of the Act. The relevant findings of the Assessing Officer are as under: “5.2.3 The submission of the assessee has been considered carefully and he same is not accepted for the following reasons. :-7-: ITA. Nos: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 39, 40, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was required to produce a copy

M/S ASPIRE SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT , CORPORATE RANGE - 1 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit/Jcit(Osd), M/S. Aspire Systems India Corporate Circle -1(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. Old No. 4, New No. 7, Ii Trust Link Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aacca-4543-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 39 & 40/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

195 of the Act. The relevant findings of the Assessing Officer are as under: “5.2.3 The submission of the assessee has been considered carefully and he same is not accepted for the following reasons. :-7-: ITA. Nos: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 39, 40, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was required to produce a copy

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. R K M POWERGEN PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue for the both the\n

195 (SC), the jurisdictional\nMadras High Court in CIT vs Electro Polychem Ltd [2007]\n294 ITR 661, in which it has been held that share capital\ncannot be assessed under Section 68.\n7.5.12 The appellant further stated that the AO made the\naddition of the share premium u/s 56(1) on the reason\nthat that the share premium of Rs.240

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. R K M POWERGEN PRIVATE LIMITED, T NAGAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue for the both the

195 (SC), the jurisdictional Madras High Court in CIT vs Electro Polychem Ltd [2007] 294 ITR 661, in which it has been held that share capital cannot be assessed under Section 68.\n7.5.12 The appellant further stated that the AO made the addition of the share premium u/s 56(1) on the reason that that the share premium of Rs.240

RANE ENGINE VALVE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

195, Explanation 2 of the Act. Therefore, he confirmed the disallowance. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5.3 Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee argued that non- resident was providing professional services in respect of filing VAT returns and compliance services in Germany. These are professional services and non-resident does not have a permanent establishment

RANE ENGINE VALVE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

195, Explanation 2 of the Act. Therefore, he confirmed the disallowance. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5.3 Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee argued that non- resident was providing professional services in respect of filing VAT returns and compliance services in Germany. These are professional services and non-resident does not have a permanent establishment

RANE ENGINE VALVES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

195, Explanation 2 of the Act. Therefore, he confirmed the disallowance. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5.3 Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee argued that non- resident was providing professional services in respect of filing VAT returns and compliance services in Germany. These are professional services and non-resident does not have a permanent establishment

RANE ENGINE VALVES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

195, Explanation 2 of the Act. Therefore, he confirmed the disallowance. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5.3 Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee argued that non- resident was providing professional services in respect of filing VAT returns and compliance services in Germany. These are professional services and non-resident does not have a permanent establishment

RANE ENGINE VALVE LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

195, Explanation 2 of the Act. Therefore, he confirmed the disallowance. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5.3 Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee argued that non- resident was providing professional services in respect of filing VAT returns and compliance services in Germany. These are professional services and non-resident does not have a permanent establishment

ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,, CHENNAI

195(1)\nwhich in clear terms lays down that tax at source is deductible only from\n\"sums chargeable\" under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, i.e.,\nchargeable under sections 4, 5 and 9 of the Income-tax Act.\"\n8.5\nIn view of the above decision (supra), the contention raised by the\nLd. CIT, DR fails. For the reasons