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:

depreciation rates prescribed under Schedule XIV of the Companies Act, 1956 and also erred in not following the guidance by DRP with respect to the treatment of provision for doubtful debts as operating or non-operating in nature. 3. The Ld. AO/ Ld. TPO erred in not providing appropriate adjustment on account of differences in working capital

COMPASS INDIA SUPPORT SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), DELHI

92D of the Act read with Rule 10D of Rules,\n4.3 modifying comparability analysis in the TP documentation and in conducting a\nfresh comparability analysis based on application of the additional revised filters in\ndetermining the ALP\n4.4 not providing the search strategy and accept-reject reasons of the fresh economic\nanalysis conducted by Ld. TPO which tantamount to choosing

COMPASS INDIA SUPPORT SERVICES PRIVATE LTD. ,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), DELHI

92D of the Act read with Rule 10D of Rules,\n4.3 modifying comparability analysis in the TP documentation and in conducting a\nfresh comparability analysis based on application of the additional revised filters in\ndetermining the ALP\n4.4 not providing the search strategy and accept-reject reasons of the fresh economic\nanalysis conducted by Ld. TPO which tantamount to choosing

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.

depreciation before the AO but in the appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee made the claim and furnished the additional evidences in support of its claim. It is well settled that the powers of the ld. CIT(A) are coterminous with the powers of the AO, therefore, considering the totality of the facts

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

In the result, appeal of the Department dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri T.S. Kapoor

92D read with section 271G of the Act are not applicable.” 15 ITA.No.108/Del./2014 M/s. Metals Russia India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. 3.5. The assessee further objected to the Order of the A.O. to apply provisions of Section 44BBB of the I.T. Act. The assessee relied upon several decisions in this regard that provisions of Section 44BBB would

OLYMPUS MEDICAL SYSTEMS INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURUGRAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1), GURUGRAM

In the result, the ground of the assessee from serial No

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

depreciation which is primary due to fact that assessee is importing demo/loaner and jigs and tools forming part of the fixed asset from its various AE’s which are being used by the assessee company including AMP expenses. 15. The Para 4.3 of TPSR (Page No. 81 of paper book) in which the international transaction has been described

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

92D in respect of any person or class of persons.]” Provisions of section 2 (28C) of the Act defines the Joint Commissioner means a person appointed to be a Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Or An Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax under subsection (1) of section 117 of the income tax act. Further with retrospective effect from 01/06/1994 section

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 read with Rule 10D of the Rules; (ii) not appreciating that payment towards service fees/reimbursements is closely linked to the primary business segments/ functions of the appellant and erred in analysing the transaction separately for the determination of arm’s length price; (iii) rejecting the Transactional Net Margin Method f'TNMM”) adopted by the appellant

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)

92D of the Act read with Rule 10D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 ("the Rules") and proceeded to make the 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 4.2. That the learned TPO erred, in law and on facts, in using single

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)

92D of the Act read with Rule 10D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 ("the Rules") and proceeded to make the 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 4.2. That the learned TPO erred, in law and on facts, in using single

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)

92D of the Act read with Rule 10D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 ("the Rules") and proceeded to make the 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 4.2. That the learned TPO erred, in law and on facts, in using single

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

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing) Denso India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit B-1/D4, Ground Floor, Circle-7(1) Mohan Cooperative Industrial New Delhi Estate, Mathura Road New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacd4255F (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Ravi Sharma, Adv & Sh. Anubhav Rastogi, Adv Respondent By Sh. Surendar Pal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 01.09.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 23.11.2020

section 92D of the Act read with Rule 10D of the Rules; 3.3. applying CUP Method in contravention of the provisions of Rule 10B of the Rules, merely based on incorrect presumptions and holding the arm’s length value of the transaction as ‘NIL’. 3.4 concluding that the payment made to overseas AEs is duplicative in nature and accordingly holding

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S JSL LTD.,, HISAR

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation on computer peripherals considering them as computers [ Ground no 2 in appeal of AO for Ay 2007-08] vii. Disallowance of bad debts written off [ Ground no 1 of appeal of AO for AY 2007-08] ITA No 4249 / Del/2012, 4110/Del/2013 & 6337/Del/2013 A Y 2007-08 and 2008-09 Jindal Steel Limited Vs ACIT Cen Circle

JINDAL STAINLESS LTD.,HISAR vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation on computer peripherals considering them as computers [ Ground no 2 in appeal of AO for Ay 2007-08] vii. Disallowance of bad debts written off [ Ground no 1 of appeal of AO for AY 2007-08] ITA No 4249 / Del/2012, 4110/Del/2013 & 6337/Del/2013 A Y 2007-08 and 2008-09 Jindal Steel Limited Vs ACIT Cen Circle

SONY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

depreciation, professional charges paid to sub-contractors, and other day to day administration expenses. Invoicing - SARD is required to raise the invoice on its AEs at the time of export of software to its AEs. Further, SARD is also required to submit an itemized statement of costs and man hours spent in connection with the export of the relevant product

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

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

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

depreciation, professional charges paid to sub-contractors, and other day to day administration expenses. Invoicing - SARD is required to raise the invoice on its AEs at the time of export of software to its AEs. Further, SARD is also required to submit an itemized statement of costs and man hours spent in connection with the export of the relevant product

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-I

The appeal is dismissed

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed. Explanation 3.—For the purpose of assessment or reassessment under this section, the Assessing Officer may assess or reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has ITA No.578/12 Page 11 of 22 escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course

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

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

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

depreciation etc. commencing from the year 2001-02 on completion of the period of tax holiday also virtually works as a deduction which has to be worked out at a future point of time, namely, after the expiry of period of tax holiday. The absence of any reference to deduction under Section 10A in Chapter