EATON POWER QUALITY PRIVATE LIMITED,PONDICHERRY vs. DCIT, PONDICHERRY

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1010/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Eaton Power Quality Private The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax, No.2, Evr Street Sedarapet, Pondicherry Circle, Puducherry 605 111, Pondicherry. Puducherry (Ut). [Pan: Aacc-6943-R] आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.: 35/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Eaton Power Quality Private The Assessing Officer, Limited, V. National E-Assessment Centre, No.2, Evr Street Sedarapet, Delhi. Puducherry 605 111, Puducherry (Ut). [Pan: Aacc-6943-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Vishal Kalra, Advocate : Shri. S. Maruthu Pandian, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.05.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

Transfer Pricing ("TP") adjustment amounting to INR 16,73,97,818 pertaining to the international transaction of receipt of corporate support services: 4.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO/ DRP/ TPO have erred in making an upward TP :-3-: IT(TP)A. No: 35/Chny/2021 & ITA No: 1010/Chny/2017 adjustment

FOSTER WHEELER FRANCE S.A.,CHENNAI vs. DDIT, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.774/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.641/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Foster Wheeler France S.A., The Dy. Director Of Income-Tax, C/O Srbc & Associates Llp, V. International Taxation -1, Chennai 6Th & 7Th Floor, “A” Block, Tidel Park, Chennai - 600 034. No.4, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Taramani, Chennai - 600 113. Pan : Aabcf 3849 C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Pricing Officer found that there was no requirement for any adjustment with regard to above said transaction. The Assessing Officer passed the draft assessment order by disallowing the payment made to Foster Wheeler USA Corporation to the extent of `3,34,99,151/- and `14,94,99,978/- under Section 40(a)(i) of the Income

FOSTER WHEELER FRANCE S.A.,CHENNAI vs. DDIT, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.774/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.641/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Foster Wheeler France S.A., The Dy. Director Of Income-Tax, C/O Srbc & Associates Llp, V. International Taxation -1, Chennai 6Th & 7Th Floor, “A” Block, Tidel Park, Chennai - 600 034. No.4, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Taramani, Chennai - 600 113. Pan : Aabcf 3849 C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Pricing Officer found that there was no requirement for any adjustment with regard to above said transaction. The Assessing Officer passed the draft assessment order by disallowing the payment made to Foster Wheeler USA Corporation to the extent of `3,34,99,151/- and `14,94,99,978/- under Section 40(a)(i) of the Income

VISTEON ASIA HOLDINGS INC.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 723/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08

price admitted by the assessee in the return of income. The valuation of share at the initial stage was made on Net Asset Value method and Profit Earning Capacity Value method. The average value of shares was arrived at `20.50 per share as on 31.03.2007, which is proximate to the date of first sale, i.e. 27.03.2007. However, the assessee claims

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

transfer pricing analysis to determine the ALP & not to determine whether there is a service or not from which the appellant benefits and thereby challenging the commercial wisdom of the appellant in making such payments. 5. That on the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO/ Ld. TPO on the directions issued by the Ld. DRP erred in concluding

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

transfer pricing analysis to determine the ALP & not to determine whether there is a service or not from which the appellant benefits and thereby challenging the commercial wisdom of the appellant in making such payments. 5. That on the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO/ Ld. TPO on the directions issued by the Ld. DRP erred in concluding

BAHWAN CYBERTEK PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.290/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO), upon Functional & Risk (FAR) analysis, rejecting the assessee’s report, held as under computing the ALP accordingly: ‘7.6 Attribution of income between the AE and the Assessee: During the course of the assessement proceedings the assessee was required to furnish the TP pricing policy ……… • The assessee has (not) furnished any Master Service Agreements that would delineate

KISHANLAL & SONS (HUF),CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2928, 2929, 2930 & 2931/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2006-07, 2006-07, 2006-07, 2012-13

Section 234A and 234B of the Act, which are consequential in nature. Vide its grounds 3 to 5, assessee assails sustenance of an 4. addition of "90,62,161/-.(Actual figure it appears is "90,66,072/-) 5. Facts apropos are that assessee, a pawn broker, was subjected to a search u/s.132 of the Act on 04.01.2012. Consequent to this

C.KISHANLAL,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2928, 2929, 2930 & 2931/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2006-07, 2006-07, 2006-07, 2012-13

Section 234A and 234B of the Act, which are consequential in nature. Vide its grounds 3 to 5, assessee assails sustenance of an 4. addition of "90,62,161/-.(Actual figure it appears is "90,66,072/-) 5. Facts apropos are that assessee, a pawn broker, was subjected to a search u/s.132 of the Act on 04.01.2012. Consequent to this

PATTABI THIYAGARAJAN,VILLUPURAM vs. DCIT, VILLUPURAM CIRCLE , VILLUPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 247/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Pattabi Thiyagarajan, The Dcit, No.135, Pjn Street, V. Villupuram Circle, Tindivanam, Villupuram Villupuram – 604 001. Pan: Aaapt 3456B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Bhoopathy, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.02.2022

234A, B and C may be computed as per law.” Aggrieved now assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee Shri Vijayaraghavan took us through the provisions of section 45(2) of the Act, wherein the legislature has brought into concept of fair market value of the asset as on the date

SMART INFORMATION WORLDWIDE INC,CHENNAI vs. ACIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 2(2), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.330/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Smart Information Worldwide Inc. Dcit बनाम/ 49 Sixth Main Road, International Taxation -2(2) Vs. Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai-600 028. Chennai-6. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-8497-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri V. Ravichandran (Ca)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V.Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-06-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06-08-2024

transfer of the capital asset" and does not permit the actual consideration to be substituted by the fair market value. 3. The learned Assessing Officer erred in adopting the fair value of the shares when there was no evidence to suggest that the sale consideration has been understated except in certain situations such as specifically provided such as in Sections

SMART INFORMATION WORLDWIDE INC,CHENNAI vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 2(2), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.329/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Smart Information Worldwide Inc. Dcit बनाम/ 49 Sixth Main Road, International Taxation -2(2) Vs. Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai-600 028. Chennai-6. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-8497-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri V. Ravichandran (Ca)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-06-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06-08-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

transfer of the capital asset" and does not permit the actual consideration to be substituted by the fair market value. 3. The learned Assessing Officer erred in adopting the fair value of the shares when there was no evidence to suggest that the sale consideration has been understated except in certain situations such as specifically provided such as in Sections

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. NEELARAJ VINOTH, PERAMBALUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

transfers from the creditors' bank accounts\nto the assessee's bank accounts were preceded by cash deposits or\ntransfers into the creditors' bank accounts. This is only post search\nenquiry and not something found at the time of search. It is not as\nif the ROI was not filed. In fact, 3 ROIs were filed. At best\nproceedings u/s.148

ACIT,, CHENNAI vs. SRI. K.SRIKANTH,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act in the computation of taxable total income without assigning proper reasons and justification. 10. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that there was no proper opportunity given before passing the impugned order and any order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice is nullity in law. 11. The Appellant craves leave

SRI K.SRIKANTH,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act in the computation of taxable total income without assigning proper reasons and justification. 10. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that there was no proper opportunity given before passing the impugned order and any order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice is nullity in law. 11. The Appellant craves leave

SRI K.SRIKANTH,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act in the computation of taxable total income without assigning proper reasons and justification. 10. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that there was no proper opportunity given before passing the impugned order and any order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice is nullity in law. 11. The Appellant craves leave

SHRI K.SRIKANTH,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act in the computation of taxable total income without assigning proper reasons and justification. 10. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that there was no proper opportunity given before passing the impugned order and any order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice is nullity in law. 11. The Appellant craves leave

SRI PONNAIYAH RAMAJAYATHAMMAL EDUCTIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, TRICHY

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Rao

price for which it is registered. Therefore, Long Term Capital Gain is calculated as under: SINO. Description Amount 1 Sale consideration 6889600 2 Cost of purchase 960575 3 Index cost of purchase 1227927 4 Long Term Capital Gains 5661673 Therefore, the Long Term Capital Gains of "56,61,673/- is brought to tax. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before

ACIT, TRICHY vs. SHRI R.VISWANATHAN, DINDIGUL

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Rao

price for which it is registered. Therefore, Long Term Capital Gain is calculated as under: SINO. Description Amount 1 Sale consideration 6889600 2 Cost of purchase 960575 3 Index cost of purchase 1227927 4 Long Term Capital Gains 5661673 Therefore, the Long Term Capital Gains of "56,61,673/- is brought to tax. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before