ITO, WARD-1(1), FARIDABAD, FARIDABAD vs. CHAMAN, FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Chaman, Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), H. No. 437, Sector-9, Faridabad Faridabad Pan: Bfapd6698P (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No.103/Del/2024 [Arising Out Of Ita No.2774/Del/2024] Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Chaman, H. No. 437, Sector-9, Ward-1(1), Faridabad, Haryana Faridabad Pan: Bfapd6698P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Gaurav, Adv. Department By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.06.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Revenue’S Appeal Ita No. 2774/Del/2024 & Assessee’S Cross Objection C.O. No. 103/Del/2024 For Assessment Year 2017- 18, Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short, The

section 10(37) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8.5. In view of the discussion in forgoing para no. 8.3.1., 8.3.2. and 8.4 above, Id. AO is directed to delete the addition of Rs. 2,66,50,843/-. Accordingly, ground no. 6 of the appeal is allowed. 9. In ground no. 7 of the appeal, the appellant has challenged

COMPUTER MODELLING GROUP LIMITED,CANADA vs. DCIT CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(2)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13,

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

2 in AY 2019-20, ground No. 1, 3 and 4 in AY 2020-21 and ground No. 3, 5 and 6 in AY 2021-22 are allowed. 16. In AY 2019-20 in ground No. 5, the assessee has challenged the non- granting of TDS credit in respect of TDS deducted on impugned receipts. We direct

COMPUTER MODELLING GROUP LIMITED,CANADA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2)(1), INT. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13,

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

2 in AY 2019-20, ground No. 1, 3 and 4 in AY 2020-21 and ground No. 3, 5 and 6 in AY 2021-22 are allowed. 16. In AY 2019-20 in ground No. 5, the assessee has challenged the non- granting of TDS credit in respect of TDS deducted on impugned receipts. We direct

COMPUTER MODELLING GROUP LIMITED,CANADA vs. ACIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE 1(2)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13,

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

2 in AY 2019-20, ground No. 1, 3 and 4 in AY 2020-21 and ground No. 3, 5 and 6 in AY 2021-22 are allowed. 16. In AY 2019-20 in ground No. 5, the assessee has challenged the non- granting of TDS credit in respect of TDS deducted on impugned receipts. We direct

KARAM VIR YADAV,GURGAON vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NFAC

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmakaramvir Yadav, Vs. Assessing Officer, 1135, Sector 46, Nfac, Delhi. Gurgaon – 122 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Abipy5863E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ranjan Chopra, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.04.2025 Date Of Order : 09.07.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 29.03.2024 For Assessment Year 2020-21 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Order Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Assessee Company, 1961. 2. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Pr. Cit Erred In Passing Order U/S 263 Of The Act, So Much So That, The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Do Not Satisfy The Statutory Twin Conditions Prescribed Under Section 263 Of The Act, Viz., (I) That The Assessment

2)(viii) and 57(iv) read with sub-section (10) of section 145B of the Income Tax Act, 1961in my income and taxes on it. I have deposited all tax amount within period of one month and applied u/s 270AA for waive off 100% penalty proceeding u/s 270A(9). 6. Sir, I have submitted all required documents to the good

KANODIA TECHNOPLAST LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, DELHI

In the result, the penalty levied u/s 270A of the Act is\ndeleted and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

TDS Range Hubbali\n(iii) ITA No. 1478/Chny/ 2024 Srinivasan Chandraekara\nChandilya vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax Non-\nCorporate Circle -7(1) Chennei\n6. Ld. DR relied the orders of the lower authorities and\nsubmitted that penalty was rightly levied on the assessee.\n7. We have heard the revival contention and gone through\nthe material available on record

KREUZ CHALLENGER PTE LTD,SINGAPURE vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE2(1)(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2019-20 Kreuz Challenger Pte Ltd., Vs Acit, 2, Venture Drive, International Taxation #24-01 Vision Exchange, Circle 2(1)(2), Singapore , 999999 New Delhi. Pan : Aahck3082A

TDS amounting to INR 3 1,33,23,843 as claimed in the return of income filed for the relevant AY. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in erroneously levying Interest under section 234B and 234D of the Act. 8 On the facts and circumstances of the case

CLIFFORD CHANCE PTE LTD,SINGAPORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE INT. TAX.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the AYs 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandrasa No. 437/Del/2023

270A of the Act is initiated for "under reporting of income in consequence of misreporting of income" is illegal and bad in law.” AY 2021-22 “1. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in completing assessment under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') at an income

CLIFFORD CHANCE PTE. LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIVIC CENTRE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the AYs 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandrasa No. 437/Del/2023

270A of the Act is initiated for "under reporting of income in consequence of misreporting of income" is illegal and bad in law.” AY 2021-22 “1. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in completing assessment under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') at an income

THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP INC,GUGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOMNE TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, GURGAON

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri M. Balaganeshthe Louis Berger Group Inc, Vs. Acit, Plot No. 3, Surinder Jakhir Dcit/Acit, International Bhawan, Sector-32, Gurgaon Taxation, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacl4067F

2,81,945/-. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material 18. available on record. The ld AO observed that the assessee had incurred interest on late payment of GST and service tax and claimed the same as deduction on the ground that it is compensatory in nature. The ld AO however held that the same would

EAGLE HUNTER SOLUTIONS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. CIT APPEALS-25, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Eagle Hunter Solutions Vs Commissioner Of Income Limited Tax (Appeals)-25 61C, Kalu Sarai, Sarvapriya New Delhi Vihar, New Delhi-110016 Pan: Aabce0565E Appellant Respondent

270A(2) (a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. That the Assessment Unit Income Tax Department erred in fact and law as well by not providing reasonable opportunity of being heard.” 3. Facts briefly stated, the Assessee filed the return of income declaring total income at Rs.1,78,55,210/-. The assessment was completed on 24.09.2022 at an income

SMT. USHA SHARMA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Eagle Hunter Solutions Vs Commissioner Of Income Limited Tax (Appeals)-25 61C, Kalu Sarai, Sarvapriya New Delhi Vihar, New Delhi-110016 Pan: Aabce0565E Appellant Respondent

270A(2) (a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. That the Assessment Unit Income Tax Department erred in fact and law as well by not providing reasonable opportunity of being heard.” 3. Facts briefly stated, the Assessee filed the return of income declaring total income at Rs.1,78,55,210/-. The assessment was completed on 24.09.2022 at an income

FIL INDIA BUSINESS & RESEARCH SERVICES P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DC, CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Chandra Mohan Gargfil India Business & Vs. Dc Research Services P. Ltd., Circle – 7(1) Private Studio – New Delhi Ncr/Ac/Ps/00/010B, Ground Floor, Worldmark 1, Asset Area 11, Aerocity, Hospitality District, Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi-110 002 Pan : Aabcf 1572 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri K. M. Gupta, Adv. Shri Rishabh Malhotra, A.R. & Shri Bhavya Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Shri Amaresh Singh, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 21.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.01.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am :

270A of the Act. The above grounds and sub-grounds are without prejudice to each other. 5 The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, modify or withdraw all or any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal as may be considered necessary at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal. The Appellant prays that appropriate

SUMITOMO CORPORATION INDIA PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-22(2), DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above and the stay application is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accontant Member Assessment Year 2020-21 Sumitomo Corporation India Vs. Dcit Pvt. Ltd. Circle -22 (2) 501 & 502, 5Th Floor West Wing, World Mark 1, Asset No.11, Hospitality District Aerocity, New Delhi-110037 Pan No.Aabcs1887M Appellant Respondent It(Tp) Appeal No.14/Del/2025 Assessment Year 2021-22 Sumitomo Corporation India Vs. Dcit Pvt. Ltd. Circle -22 (2) 501 & 502, 5Th Floor Delhi West Wing, World Mark 1, Asset No.11, Hospitality District Aerocity, New Delhi-110037 Pan No.Aabcs1887M Appellant Respondent

TDS'), Tax Collected at Source ('TCS') and Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA') credit (iv) Erroneous application of surcharge at 12% vis-à-vis surcharge rate of 10% (as provided under section 115BAA of the Act); and (v) Non-computation of interest charged under sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. The Appellant has also filed a rectification application dated

MANPOWERGROUP SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, DELHI , JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Naveen Chandra

270A(9)(a), 271B and 271AA read with section 274 of the Act. 9. The Assessee prays for leave to add, alter, amend and/ or' modify any of the grounds of appeal at or before the hearing of the appeal.” 4. Ground Nos 1 to 4 pertain to the deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act. 5. Brief facts

INVESCO HOLDING COMPANY (US) INC.,USA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE INT. TAX. 2(1)(1), NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. G.S. Pannu & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

section 270A of the Act. 2. The Assessee is a tax resident of the USA and provides Information Technology ("IT") Application services, IT Infrastructure services and IT security ("IT services") to its AEs globally including the ones present in India. The holds Tax Residency Certificate ("TRC") and claims to be eligible to be governed by the provisions of the India

INVESCO UK LIMITED,UK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE INT.TAX. 2(1)(1), NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. G.S. Pannu & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

section 270A of the Act. 2. The Assessee is a tax resident of the USA and provides Information Technology ("IT") Application services, IT Infrastructure services and IT security ("IT services") to its AEs globally including the ones present in India. The holds Tax Residency Certificate ("TRC") and claims to be eligible to be governed by the provisions of the India

SERVICENOW NEDERLAND BV,NETHERLANDS vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 3(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA No

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar: (A.Y. 2020-21) & : (A.Y. 2021-22)

2 above, on the facts and circumstances of the c and in law, the Ld. AO and Ld. DRP erred in making an addition of INR 171,92,37,658 to the incom of the Appellant on account of subscription, professional and training services without appreciat the fact that these services do not fall within the purview of fees

SERVICENOW NEDERLAND BV,NETHERLANDS vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 3(1)(2), DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA No

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar: (A.Y. 2020-21) & : (A.Y. 2021-22)

2 above, on the facts and circumstances of the c and in law, the Ld. AO and Ld. DRP erred in making an addition of INR 171,92,37,658 to the incom of the Appellant on account of subscription, professional and training services without appreciat the fact that these services do not fall within the purview of fees