M/S. GLOBERIAN INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

depreciation 1,14,36,265 (As per para 3 above) ii) Addition under transfer pricing 4,12,04,919 adjustment as discussed in para 4.3 above TOTAL TAXABLE INOCME 5,26,41,184 3. Aggrieved with the order passed by the AO, the assessee company come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 4. We have

A.T. KEARNEY LTD.- INDIA BRANCH OFFICE,GURGAON vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4405/Del/2011 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2003-04 बनाम A.T. Kearney Ltd., Adit India Branch Office, Vs. Circle 1(1) 14Th Floor, Tower D, International Taxation, Global Business Park, New Delhi. Gurgaon.

depreciation had been allowed by the Ld. Assessing Officer by way of rectification of original assessment order dated March 23, 2006. 6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer/Hon’ble DRP has erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act. 7. That on the facts and circumstances

DCM SHRIRAM INDUSTRIS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Challa Nagemdra Prasad & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

depreciation. Regard must also be had to the fact that Section 10B(1) is essentially concerned with the grant of exemptions to newly established hundred per cent export-oriented undertakings and the deduction of profits and gains derived by such an enterprise. Sub-section (8) thereof enables an assessee to opt out of the exemption provisions contained therein subject

GEODIS OVERSEAS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

10 of the Rules there under to determine the ALP of the international transaction of management support and IT charges. 3.9 That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the directions passed by DRP and the subsequent orders passed by lower authorities are bad in law and void ab-initio as the DRP has enhanced the disallowance

ADOBE SYSTEMS INDIA P.LTD,NOIDA vs. DCIT, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

depreciation in relation to lease rent. D. Reversal of provision for Rent Equalisation amounting to INR 46,87,009 2.9 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO and DRP have erred in not appreciating that out of the disallowance of INR 19, II ,08,847, an amount

VEDANTA LTD (SUCCESSOR TO CAIRN INDIA LTD),GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-26(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

144C of the 2 Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) qua the assessment year 2013-14 on the grounds inter alia that :- “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) erred in assessing the total income and adjusted book profit of the Appellant at Rs.906

HEWITT ASSOCIATES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year : 2007-08

10) of Section 144C of the Act, we request your goodself to allow us the benefit of working capital adjustment. Based on the above submission, we request your goodself to rectify the above- mentioned defects by passing a suitable order under section 154 of the Act and accordingly issue the revised assessment order. ------------------------------ Unquote 2. In addition to the above

MOBASE INDIA PVT. LTD. ,UTTAR PRADESH vs. ACIT , DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumara.Y. : 2016-17 Mobase India Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Acit, 1C, Front Part Of Front Building, National E-Assessment Centre, Udyog Vihar, Ecotech-Ii, Greater New Delhi. Noida 201306, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecd 8832 G Assessee By : Sh. Rajesh Dua, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 06.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.02.2024

depreciable assets, the sale proceeds of the assets is required to be reduced from the WDV of the assets as per the provisions of section 43(6) 3 Mobase India P Ltd., of the Act, which the assessee has duly done following the provisions of section 43(6). D- Other Grounds 8. Levy of Interest U/s 234B, 234C and 234D

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. EXL SERVICE.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD., 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:

10 or section 11 or section 12; II. provided any such amount is debited to the profit and loss account during the relevant previous year.” 36. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Pr. CIT Vs Bhushan Steel Ltd. in ITA No. 593/2015, order dated 29.09.2015 by the Hon’ble Delhi H.C. " Quippo Telecom Infrastructure Ltd. Vs ACIT

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:

10 or section 11 or section 12; II. provided any such amount is debited to the profit and loss account during the relevant previous year.” 36. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Pr. CIT Vs Bhushan Steel Ltd. in ITA No. 593/2015, order dated 29.09.2015 by the Hon’ble Delhi H.C. " Quippo Telecom Infrastructure Ltd. Vs ACIT

VIBRACOUSTIC INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT,SPECIAL RANGE-9, NEW DELHI

In the result, no question of law arises

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmavibracoustic India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit R-561, Shankar Road, Special Range-9 New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi - 110011

144C of the Act vide order dated 19.12.2017 and the total income was determined at Rs.49,97,13,696/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) who vide order dated 15.04.2019 in Appeal No.10442/17-18 dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), assessee is now in appeal

VIBRACOUSTIC INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT,SPECIAL RANGE-9, NEW DELHI

In the result, no question of law arises

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmavibracoustic India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit R-561, Shankar Road, Special Range-9 New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi

144C of the Act vide order dated 26.12.2017 and the total income was determined at Rs.59,91,92,361/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) who vide order dated 15.04.2019 in Appeal No.10502/17-18 dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), assessee is now in appeal

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

144C(13) of the Act, taxing the receipts amounting to Rs. 10,37,32,010/- under s. 44BB of the Act, is wrong and bad in law as the same cannot be taxed at all in terms of the beneficial provisions under India- Canada DTAA. 4. That the Ld. DRP has grossly erred on in law by blindly relying upon

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

144C(13) of the Act, taxing the receipts amounting to Rs. 10,37,32,010/- under s. 44BB of the Act, is wrong and bad in law as the same cannot be taxed at all in terms of the beneficial provisions under India- Canada DTAA. 4. That the Ld. DRP has grossly erred on in law by blindly relying upon

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

144C(13) of the Act, taxing the receipts amounting to Rs. 10,37,32,010/- under s. 44BB of the Act, is wrong and bad in law as the same cannot be taxed at all in terms of the beneficial provisions under India- Canada DTAA. 4. That the Ld. DRP has grossly erred on in law by blindly relying upon

PHI SEEDS PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

144C of I.T. Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2010-11. 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: The assessee filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs.33,42,28,149/-. Subsequently the same was revised to Rs.33,39,32,080/-. 3. The assessee is a captive service provider, providing (a) engineering design and related services, (b) financial

LOKESH KUMAR AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-45(5), DELHI

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

144C of I.T. Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2010-11. 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: The assessee filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs.33,42,28,149/-. Subsequently the same was revised to Rs.33,39,32,080/-. 3. The assessee is a captive service provider, providing (a) engineering design and related services, (b) financial

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

144C(S) of the Act without judiciously and independently considering e factual and legal objections to the draft assessment order, is illegal and bad in law. 1.2 That the DRP erred on facts and in law in not directing the assessing officer to delete certain additions/ disallowance which were squarely covered in favour of the appellant by the appellate orders