EXL SERVICE.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

92D of the Act read with Rule 10D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 ("the Rules") as well as fresh search and in particular modifying/ rejecting the filters applied by the Appellant; 5.2 disregarding multiple year/prior years' data used by the Appellant in the TP documentation and holding that current year (i.e. Financial Year 2009-10) data for comparable companies

(Now known as Sony India Limited)

gains of one international transaction against another international transaction. (xvii) The Assessing Officer/ TPO without specific reference had in substance applied the Cost Plus Method (‗CP Method‘, for short) for computing the arm‘s length price of the international transaction, i.e. the AMP transaction between the AE resident abroad and the Indian assessed. The CP Method

LI & FUNG INDIA PVT LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed and the order dated 25/11/11 of the ITAT Tribunal, Delhi Branch

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

gained any advantage on account of locational saving associated with the export of goods between exporters and overseas customers. Thus, it is submitted that the adjustment made by the TPO on ground of locational saving, is not sustainable and liable to be deleted. 19. The learned counsel also urged that the amount of adjustment computed

LM WIND POWER AS ,DENMARK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 2(2)(1), DELHI

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Lm Wind Power As, Vs, Acit, Circle Juptervej 6, 6000 Kolding, International Tax 2(2)(1), Denmark – 999999. Delhi (Pan :Aabcl8590Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate Shri Arpitgoyal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2025 Date Of Order : 21.11.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appealpreferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2025 Passed By The Acit, Circle Int. Tax 2(2)(1), Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2020-21 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessment Order Dated 29.07.2024 Passed Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (He Act") For Assessment Year 2020-21 Assessing The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.81,14, 14,893 Is Bad In Law, Void- Ab-Initio & Therefore, Liable To Be Quashed And/ Or Set Aside.

92D, the prescribed income-tax authority referred to in the said sub-section may direct that such person shall pay, by way of penalty, a sum of five hundred thousand rupees.” (emphasis supplied) 54. He submitted that in terms of section 271AA(1)(ii), penalty of 2% of the value of each international transaction may be levied for failure

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CORNELL OVERSEAS (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 2166/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Dcit, Vs Cornell Overseas (P) Ltd., Circle-3(1), B-235, Okhla Indl. Area, Phase-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacc0034F Assessee By : Ms. Vandana Bhandari, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.05.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 28.02.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xx, New Delhi.

Gains from Business including sale proceeds of sample designs forms part of operating profits of the company and not 'other receipt' as misconceived by AO. As explained in the Board Circular, what is not included in the profits of the business for the purpose of section 80HHC are receipts by way of brokerage, commission, rent, interest or any other receipt

M/S. MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, GURGAON

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble, [Assessment Year: 2008-09]

92D of the Act and Rule 10D of the Rules and disregarding the ALP as determined by the Appellant in the TP documentation; disregarding multiple year/ prior years’ data as used by the appellant in the TP documentation and holding that current year (i.e. FY 2007-08) data for comparable companies should be used despite the fact that the same

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAVISITE INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Sri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2011-12 M/S Navisite India Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward -17(4) Vipul Plaza, 1St Floor New Delhi Golf Course Road Sector-54, Sun City Gurgaon 122 002 Pan: Aaccn0289R & A.Y. 2011-12 Ito, Ward 17(4) Vs. M/S Navisite India Pvt.Ltd. Room No.225D New Delhi C.R.Building I.P.Estate New Delhi 110 002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh.Manoneet Dalal, Adv. Sh. Prag Garg, Adv. Sh.Yishu Goel, Adv. Sh. Jatin Chawla, Adv. Department By: Sri Sarabjeet Singh, Sr.D.R.

gain/(loss), bank charges, provision for doubtful debts and provisions written back as non-operating items. 5.11. Ld.TPO/A.O./DRP failed to appreciate that there is no intention of shifting of profits by the Appellant. 5.12. Ld.TPO/A.O./DRP has grossly erred on facts and in law in denying the risk adjustment for difference in the risk profile of the Appellant

NAVISITE INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Sri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2011-12 M/S Navisite India Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward -17(4) Vipul Plaza, 1St Floor New Delhi Golf Course Road Sector-54, Sun City Gurgaon 122 002 Pan: Aaccn0289R & A.Y. 2011-12 Ito, Ward 17(4) Vs. M/S Navisite India Pvt.Ltd. Room No.225D New Delhi C.R.Building I.P.Estate New Delhi 110 002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh.Manoneet Dalal, Adv. Sh. Prag Garg, Adv. Sh.Yishu Goel, Adv. Sh. Jatin Chawla, Adv. Department By: Sri Sarabjeet Singh, Sr.D.R.

gain/(loss), bank charges, provision for doubtful debts and provisions written back as non-operating items. 5.11. Ld.TPO/A.O./DRP failed to appreciate that there is no intention of shifting of profits by the Appellant. 5.12. Ld.TPO/A.O./DRP has grossly erred on facts and in law in denying the risk adjustment for difference in the risk profile of the Appellant

M/S D.E. SHAW INDIA ADVISORY SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed in terms of our specific observations and

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2010-11 Ay: 2011-12 Ay: 2012-13 D.E. Shaw India Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, E-20, 1St & 2Nd Floor, Circle 7(1), Main Market, Hauz Khas, New Delhi. New Delhi-110016 (Pan: Aabce6097P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Kapil Hirani, Ca Shri Suresh Tolani, Adv. Shri Darpan Kirpalani Respondent By : Shri T.M. Shivakumar, Cit ( Dr)

section 92D of the Act read with Rule 10D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 ("the Rules") and proceeded to make a transfer pricing addition based on re-determination of the arm's length price of the international transaction. Assessment year: 2010-11, 11-12, 12-13 3.2 That the learned TPO erred, in law and on facts in using

D.E. SHAW INDIA ADVISORY SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed in terms of our specific observations and

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2010-11 Ay: 2011-12 Ay: 2012-13 D.E. Shaw India Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, E-20, 1St & 2Nd Floor, Circle 7(1), Main Market, Hauz Khas, New Delhi. New Delhi-110016 (Pan: Aabce6097P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Kapil Hirani, Ca Shri Suresh Tolani, Adv. Shri Darpan Kirpalani Respondent By : Shri T.M. Shivakumar, Cit ( Dr)

section 92D of the Act read with Rule 10D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 ("the Rules") and proceeded to make a transfer pricing addition based on re-determination of the arm's length price of the international transaction. Assessment year: 2010-11, 11-12, 12-13 3.2 That the learned TPO erred, in law and on facts in using

D.E. SHAW INDIA ADVISORY SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed in terms of our specific observations and

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2010-11 Ay: 2011-12 Ay: 2012-13 D.E. Shaw India Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, E-20, 1St & 2Nd Floor, Circle 7(1), Main Market, Hauz Khas, New Delhi. New Delhi-110016 (Pan: Aabce6097P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Kapil Hirani, Ca Shri Suresh Tolani, Adv. Shri Darpan Kirpalani Respondent By : Shri T.M. Shivakumar, Cit ( Dr)

section 92D of the Act read with Rule 10D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 ("the Rules") and proceeded to make a transfer pricing addition based on re-determination of the arm's length price of the international transaction. Assessment year: 2010-11, 11-12, 12-13 3.2 That the learned TPO erred, in law and on facts in using

RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, we direct the AO to reduce the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act by the amount of reversal of the provision of Rs

Bench: Sh. I. C.Sudhir Judicialmember & Sh. Prashant Maharishia.Y.: - 2008-09 Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs Acit 12Th Floor, Devika Tower, Range -15 6, Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacr0127N (Appellant) (Respondent)

92D of the Act read with Rule 10D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (‗Rules‘); not accepting the overseas Associated Enterprises (‗AEs‘) 2.2 ITA 196 Del 2013 Ranbaxy Laboratories limited V ACIT A.Y. 2008-09 Page 3 of 134 as the tested party, being the least complex of the transacting entities and instead considering the appellant as the tested party

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishinew Delhi Television Ltd, Vs. Acit, 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase- Circle-13(1), Iii, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. New Delhi Television Ltd, Circle-13(1), 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Gain on sales of shares of Astra Avani 105789125 confirmed networks Limited 7. We first proceed to decide the ITA number 3996/Del/2014 filed by the learned assessing officer. 8. The first ground of appeal is that during the year under consideration the appellant charged expenses amounting to ₹ 118343111 under the head employee stock option expenses to its profit and loss

M/S. NEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishinew Delhi Television Ltd, Vs. Acit, 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase- Circle-13(1), Iii, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. New Delhi Television Ltd, Circle-13(1), 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Gain on sales of shares of Astra Avani 105789125 confirmed networks Limited 7. We first proceed to decide the ITA number 3996/Del/2014 filed by the learned assessing officer. 8. The first ground of appeal is that during the year under consideration the appellant charged expenses amounting to ₹ 118343111 under the head employee stock option expenses to its profit and loss

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BBC WORLD INDIA (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee and the learned assessing officer are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

capital requirements where part of the loan is s interest free and other loan on interest rate of LIBOR +0.06 percentage. The method adopted by the assessee for benchmarking of the other international transaction was CUP Method and assessee has compared the rate of commission charged by it with the commission charged by an unrelated 3rd party in India

EVALUESERVE.COM PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

gains. At that stage the aggregate of the incomes under other heads and the provisions for set off and carry forward contained in Sections 70, 72and 74 of the Act would be premature for application. The deductions under Section 10A therefore would be prior to the commencement of the exercise to be undertaken under Chapter

EVALUESERVE.COM PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

gains. At that stage the aggregate of the incomes under other heads and the provisions for set off and carry forward contained in Sections 70, 72and 74 of the Act would be premature for application. The deductions under Section 10A therefore would be prior to the commencement of the exercise to be undertaken under Chapter

NOKIA INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE-6, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: disregarding the ALP determined by the Appellant and proceeded to determine the ALP himself.

92D of the Act. 3.4. That on fact of the case and in law, Ld. AO/Ld. TPO/ Hon'ble DRP has erred in application of inappropriate filters based on different financial year end, export service income and employee cost for identifying companies comparable to the Appellant. 3.5. That on the facts of the case

SABRE DECISION TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL LLC,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE 3(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

92D & 92E. A reasonable guidance however, may be drawn from this definition for other sections in the Act in respect of a fixed place PE. The above definition suggests that a fixed place of business is required for a permanent establishment to exist. The AO in his order does not indicate as to how a fixed place PE exists