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

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

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

JONES LANG LASALLE PROPERTY CONSULTANTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI, INDIA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 13(1), DELHI, INDIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Stay

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2020-21 & Stay Application No.61/Del/2025 ( In Ita No. 3964/Del/2024 ) Assessment Year: 2020-21

TDS of ₹ 1,96,45,34,436/- claimed by the Appellant in ITR Form. Consequential grounds: 16. Ld. AO has erred, in law and in facts in initiating penalty proceedings under section 274 read with section 270A of the Act. SA No. 61/Del/2025 17. The Ld. AO has erred, in law and in facts, by: 17.1 levying an interest

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

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 the Ld. AO to grant TDS credit to the assessee in accordance with

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

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 the Ld. AO to grant TDS credit to the assessee in accordance with

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

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 the Ld. AO to grant TDS credit to the assessee in accordance with

HAREON SOLAR SINGAPORE PRIVATE LIMITED,SINGAPORE vs. DCIT INT. TAXATION CIRCLE-2(1)(1), NEW DELHI

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

TDS was duly deducted on the sale transaction as\nwell on interest on CCD. It was submitted that ld. DRP erred in observing that\nthe assessee has not made any other investment. A prayer was made by ld.\nCounsel for the assessee to grant benefit to the assessee under DTAA between\nIndia and Singapore by holding that capital gains earned

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

section 153A of the Act was issued to the\nassessee on 18-01-2021. In the compliance of the notice the\nassessee, filed the return of income declaring total income\nof Rs.11,25,52,870/-. Statutory notice u/s 142(1) of the Act\nwas issued on 20-02-2022.After considering the submission\nfiled by the assessee the ld. Assessing officer completed

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)

section 270A of the Act. The Appellant craves leave to alter, amend, or withdraw all or any of the grounds herein or add any further grounds as may be considered necessary either before or during the hearing.” 3. Facts, in brief, are that the assessee company filed its original return of income for the assessment year

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)

section 270A of the Act. The Appellant craves leave to alter, amend, or withdraw all or any of the grounds herein or add any further grounds as may be considered necessary either before or during the hearing.” 3. Facts, in brief, are that the assessee company filed its original return of income for the assessment year

GE PRECISION HEALTHCARE LLC,USA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MINTO ROAD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

270A of the Act.” 3. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 3 GE Precision Healthcare LLC 4. GE Precision Healthcare LLC, is a company incorporated in the state of Delaware, USA. It carries on healthcare business for the General Electric group, and is a global medical device provider that designs, develops, manufactures

SAIC MOTOR OVERSEAS INTELLIGENT MOBILITY TECHNOLOGY CO . LTD.,SHANGHAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, HSIIDC BUILDING

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2020-21

270A of the Act is initiated for "under reporting of income in consequence of misreporting of income" is illegal and bad in law.” 3. The assessee has also raised the additional grounds as under:- "3.2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the handwritten DIN, which is also not supported by any records

HIRERIGHT LLC ,USA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, GURGAON, GURGAON

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in granting TDS credit for INR 91,91,828 as against the TDS credit of INR Rs. 93,26,997 claimed by the Appellant, thereby resulting is a short-grant of TDS credit

ADVICS COMPANY LTD. ,KARNATAKA vs. ACIT CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1(1)(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI G.S. PANNU (Vice President), MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)

TDS under section 192 of the Act, hence, cannot be treated as FTS under section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and Article 12 of the tax treaty. Accordingly, there was no obligation on the part of the assessee to withhold tax at source under section 195 of the Act. 16. Now coming to the applicability of the case

HIRERIGHT LIMITED,LONDON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), INT. TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the AYs 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2020-21 & Asstt. Year: 2019-20

3 in AY 2020-21 relates to short grant of TDS credit by Rs. 1,35,168/-. The Ld. AO is directed to look into it and take remedial action after due verification. 19. In ground No. 4 the assessee has challenged the recovery of refund of Rs. 55,647/- and levy of interest of Rs. 5,286/-under section

HIRERIGHT LTD,UK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the AYs 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2020-21 & Asstt. Year: 2019-20

3 in AY 2020-21 relates to short grant of TDS credit by Rs. 1,35,168/-. The Ld. AO is directed to look into it and take remedial action after due verification. 19. In ground No. 4 the assessee has challenged the recovery of refund of Rs. 55,647/- and levy of interest of Rs. 5,286/-under section

GOTO TECHOLOGIES IRELAND UNLIMITED COMPANY(FORMERLY KNOWN AS LOGMEIN IRELAND UNLIMITED COMPANY),IRELAND vs. ACIT CIRCLE INTL. TAXATION 1(3)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS credit of INR 3,19,48,723 as per Final Assessment Order issued under section 143(3) read with section 144C for the subject year, as against INR 3,19,50,472 as per the latest Form 26AS available on the income tax e- filing/TRACES portal. 4. Initiation of penalty proceedings under section 270A

INDIA PROPERTY (MAURITIUS) COMPANY II,MAURITIUS vs. ACIT, CIRCLE INT. TAXATION 2(1)(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

3. The Learned AO erred in law in not following the binding directions issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes (“CBDT”), Supreme Court ruling in the case of Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 132 Taxman 373 (SC) and several other judicial precedents which held TRC to be sufficient to claim relief under IM Treaty. 4. The learned AO erred in levying