M/S AT & T GLOBAL BETWORK SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[A.Y 2008-09] At &T Global Network Services [India] Vs. The Dy. C.I.T Pvt Ltd, Vatika Triangle Circle - 2 (1) 3Rd Floor, Sushant Lok - I New Delhi Block A, Gurgaon Pan: Aafca 8810 L [A.Y 2008-09] The Dy. C.I.T Vs. At &T Global Network Services Circle 2(1) [India] Pvt Ltd, Vatika Triangle 3Rd Floor, Sushant Lok - I New Delhi Block A, Gurgaon Pan: Aafca 8810 L (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kanchan Kaushal, Adv Ms. Chinu Bhasin, Ca Department By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit-Dr

194J but was actually deducted under section 194C, such a deduction would not meet the requirements of section 40(a)(ia). We noted that prior to this decision the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. S.K. Tekriwal 361 ITR 432 vide order dated 3rd December, 2014 taken a view by which the Hon'ble High

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-6, , NEW DELHI vs. NOKIA INDIA SALES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

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

depreciation on phones issued to the employees. The Assessing Officer heavily relied on earlier assessments in case of NIPL and specifically noted that facts are same and there was no reason to deviate from the earlier findings. The CIT(A) also upheld the additions by the Assessing Officer and held that there was no supporting documents to show that phones

NOKIA INDIA SALES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-6, , NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

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

depreciation on phones issued to the employees. The Assessing Officer heavily relied on earlier assessments in case of NIPL and specifically noted that facts are same and there was no reason to deviate from the earlier findings. The CIT(A) also upheld the additions by the Assessing Officer and held that there was no supporting documents to show that phones

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

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

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Kul Bharat

depreciation rates charged by the assessee vis-à-vis comparables while determining the Arm's Length Price. The TPO erred in treating three line items in the financial of comparables i.e. foreign exchange gain and loss, provisions for bad and doubtful debts and bank charges as non-operating while computing the operating margins of the comparables. He further contended that

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

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. G. S. Pannu & Ms Suchitra Kamblenokia India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit C/O. Tec, Level 18, Circle - 10(2), Dlf Cyber City, Phase-Iii, New Delhi. Building No.5, Tower A, Gurgaon. (Pan : Aaacn 2170 R)

depreciation on the mobile handsets without considering ownership of handsets and nature of expenditure? 4. That the appellant craves to add, amend, alter or modify any of the above grounds of appeal.” 4. The assessee company was incorporated in 1995 and it is a wholly owned subsidiary of Nokia Corporation, Finland. The company is primarily engaged in the business

NOKIA INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. G. S. Pannu & Ms Suchitra Kamblenokia India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit C/O. Tec, Level 18, Circle - 10(2), Dlf Cyber City, Phase-Iii, New Delhi. Building No.5, Tower A, Gurgaon. (Pan : Aaacn 2170 R)

depreciation on the mobile handsets without considering ownership of handsets and nature of expenditure? 4. That the appellant craves to add, amend, alter or modify any of the above grounds of appeal.” 4. The assessee company was incorporated in 1995 and it is a wholly owned subsidiary of Nokia Corporation, Finland. The company is primarily engaged in the business

IDEA CELLULAR LTD.,NOIDA vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Spice Communication Ltd., Tax, Circle 9(1), Room No. 163, C/O- Idea Cellular Ltd., A-68, C.R. Building, New Delhi Sector-64, Noida. Gir/Pan : Aagcs6070H (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No. 77/Del/2011 [In Ita No. 988/Del/2011] Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Spice Communication Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income C/O- Idea Cellular Ltd., A-68, Tax, Circle 9(1), Room No. 163, Sector-64, Noida. C.R. Building, New Delhi Gir/Pan : Aagcs6070H (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Idea Cellular Ltd., A-68, Vs. Acit, Circle-50(1), New Delhi Sector-64, Noida Gir/Pan : Aaacb2100P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Ronak G. Doshi, Ca Department By Sh. B.K. Singh, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 05.04.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 25.05.2016 & C.O. No. 77/Del/2011

Section 91(vii). Following our own judgment, we are upholding the order of the ld CIT(A) holding that the assessee is not liable for TDS u/s 194J, interest thereon and consequently not being the assessee in default. The orders of ld. CIT(A) are uphold.” Thus it is clear that the Jaipur bench has given a finding of fact

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SPICE COMMUNICATION LTD., NOIDA

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Spice Communication Ltd., Tax, Circle 9(1), Room No. 163, C/O- Idea Cellular Ltd., A-68, C.R. Building, New Delhi Sector-64, Noida. Gir/Pan : Aagcs6070H (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No. 77/Del/2011 [In Ita No. 988/Del/2011] Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Spice Communication Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income C/O- Idea Cellular Ltd., A-68, Tax, Circle 9(1), Room No. 163, Sector-64, Noida. C.R. Building, New Delhi Gir/Pan : Aagcs6070H (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Idea Cellular Ltd., A-68, Vs. Acit, Circle-50(1), New Delhi Sector-64, Noida Gir/Pan : Aaacb2100P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Ronak G. Doshi, Ca Department By Sh. B.K. Singh, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 05.04.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 25.05.2016 & C.O. No. 77/Del/2011

Section 91(vii). Following our own judgment, we are upholding the order of the ld CIT(A) holding that the assessee is not liable for TDS u/s 194J, interest thereon and consequently not being the assessee in default. The orders of ld. CIT(A) are uphold.” Thus it is clear that the Jaipur bench has given a finding of fact

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

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

depreciation on lease premium since such premium constitutes ‘business or commercial rights’ under section 32(1 )(ii) of the Act. 31. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in disallowing expenditure of Rs.23,44,222/- incurred under the head of ‘Community Development’ on the ground that the same was not incurred wholly and exclusively for earning business

NOIDA POWER COMPANY LTD.,GREATER NOIDA vs. JCIT, NOIDA

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

depreciation allowance while calculating the total income taxable under the provisions of the Act other than section 115JB thereof in the impugned order under appeal. 6(a) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(Appeals) without application of mind erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in disallowing additional

M/S. BHARTI CELLULAR LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

depreciation under 72 and section 32(2) of the Act respectively. 7. That the AO erred on facts and in law in charging interest under sections 234B of the Act. The appellant craves to add, amend, alter or vary, any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 3.0 The Ld. Authorized

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

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing)

194J without the actual basis for the same on part of the Assessing Officer is not just and proper. The Ld. DR’s contention that discounts were given by way of debit notes and the same were not adjusted or mentioned in the invoice generated upon original sales made by the assessee, does not seem tenable after going through

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

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing)

194J without the actual basis for the same on part of the Assessing Officer is not just and proper. The Ld. DR’s contention that discounts were given by way of debit notes and the same were not adjusted or mentioned in the invoice generated upon original sales made by the assessee, does not seem tenable after going through

M/S HAVELLS INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihavells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi Cr Building Ip Estate, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Ltu, Nbcc Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit (Ltu), Vs. Havells India Ltd, Nbcc Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0351E (Appellant) (Respondent)

depreciation. In view of this ground number [2] of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 30. Ground number [3] of the appeal of the assessee is against the order of the learned CIT – A in not allowing the interest income earned amounting to ₹ 44,41,951 as part of the business income claimed by the appellant company. The learned

ACIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S HAVELLS INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihavells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi Cr Building Ip Estate, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Ltu, Nbcc Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit (Ltu), Vs. Havells India Ltd, Nbcc Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0351E (Appellant) (Respondent)

depreciation. In view of this ground number [2] of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 30. Ground number [3] of the appeal of the assessee is against the order of the learned CIT – A in not allowing the interest income earned amounting to ₹ 44,41,951 as part of the business income claimed by the appellant company. The learned

M/S HAVELLS INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihavells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi Cr Building Ip Estate, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Ltu, Nbcc Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit (Ltu), Vs. Havells India Ltd, Nbcc Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0351E (Appellant) (Respondent)

depreciation. In view of this ground number [2] of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 30. Ground number [3] of the appeal of the assessee is against the order of the learned CIT – A in not allowing the interest income earned amounting to ₹ 44,41,951 as part of the business income claimed by the appellant company. The learned

NOKIA INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavanokia India Pvt. Ltd., Add. Cit, Tec, Level 18, Dlf Special Range-6, Cyber City, Vs. New Delhi Phase-Iii, Building No.5, Tower A, Gurgaon-122 002 Pan:Aaacn 2170R (Appellant) (Respondent)

depreciation in respect of free of costs phones given to the distributors and dealers even though the expenditure was treated as capital expenditure. The Ld. AR Nokia India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT submitted that if ground No.4 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed, this ground will not survive. 7.0 Per contra, the Ld. CIT-DR placed extensive reliance

M/S. HAL OFFSHORE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4673/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Acit, Vs M/S Hal Offshore Ltd., Central Circle-15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bengali Market, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach3144B Ita No. 2081/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 M/S Hal Offshore Ltd., Vs Dcit, C/O M/S Rra Taxindia, Circle-12(1), D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110049 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach3144B Assessee By : Sh. Somil Agarwal, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.07.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

194J of the Act. We also find the case laws referred by the ld. AR have no applicability on the facts of the case. Hence, keeping in view, the provisions of the Act, we uphold the decision of the ld. CIT (A) on this ground. 9. Ground No.5 & 6 pertains to disallowance on account of vessel repair & maintenance

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HAL OFFSHORE LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4673/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Acit, Vs M/S Hal Offshore Ltd., Central Circle-15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bengali Market, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach3144B Ita No. 2081/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 M/S Hal Offshore Ltd., Vs Dcit, C/O M/S Rra Taxindia, Circle-12(1), D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110049 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach3144B Assessee By : Sh. Somil Agarwal, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.07.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

194J of the Act. We also find the case laws referred by the ld. AR have no applicability on the facts of the case. Hence, keeping in view, the provisions of the Act, we uphold the decision of the ld. CIT (A) on this ground. 9. Ground No.5 & 6 pertains to disallowance on account of vessel repair & maintenance