DEFSYS SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

10, Hailey Road, New Delhi PAN: AACCD 5328 D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv Ms Aayushi Gupta, Adv Department By : Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 26.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 28.03.2024 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 20.01.2023 framed u/s 153A r.w.s 144C

L.S CABLE INDIA PVT LTD ,REWARI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE13(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] L S Cable India Pvt.Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.28-31, Sector-5, Cirlce-13(1), Phase-Ii, Hsiidc Gc Bawal, New Delhi Rewari, Haryana-23501. Pan-Aabcl3621Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Gaurav Garg, Ca Respondent By Shri S.K.Jhadav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 01.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.05.2025

disallowance/ additions and in initiating penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or delete such other objections before or during the course of hearing before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT'), so as to enable the Hon'ble ITAT to decide on the grounds raised

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 vs. SUMITOMO CORPORATION INDIA (P) LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

disallowance of deduction claimed under section 10B of the Act.  Said final assessment order was accompanied by notice of demand issued under section 156 and notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act for initiating penalty proceedings. objections before the DRP, even though the Respondent was mandated by law to first forward draft assessment

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6 vs. MICROSOFT INDIA ( R & D) PVT. LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

disallowance of deduction claimed under section 10B of the Act.  Said final assessment order was accompanied by notice of demand issued under section 156 and notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act for initiating penalty proceedings. objections before the DRP, even though the Respondent was mandated by law to first forward draft assessment

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6 vs. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

disallowance of deduction claimed under section 10B of the Act.  Said final assessment order was accompanied by notice of demand issued under section 156 and notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act for initiating penalty proceedings. objections before the DRP, even though the Respondent was mandated by law to first forward draft assessment

EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

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

section 144C(10) of the Act; (d) the submissions/ evidence(s) placed on record has not been considered by the assessing officer, in blatant violation of fundamental principles of assessment. Further, additions/ disallowances

MANKIND PHARMA LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), MEERUT

In the result, the additional Ground No

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

144C(13) read with section 153(3) of the Act, is illegal being barred by limitation, void ab initio and is liable to be quashed. 3. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in making transfer 2 I.T.A. No.2313/Del/2022 pricing adjustment of Rs. 21,92,40,676/- in relation to the specified domestic transactions undertaken

DEFSYS SOLUTIONS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

section 143(3) r.w.s 144C of the Act and titled the order as “Assessment order”. 4. While framing the said order, the Assessing Officer concluded the assessment by observing at Para 13 as under: Total Income as per return of income filed 5,68,38,810 uls 139 of the IT Act on 30.03.2021 61,83,77,505/- Deemed total

MAVENIR INDIA PVT. LTD. (EARLIER KNOWN AS COMVERSE NETWORK SYSTEM INDIA PVT. LTD.),GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1), GURGOAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

disallowance of deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 10AA of the Act amounting to Rs. 3.17 crores and framed an order dated 21.02.2018, which was captioned as ‘Draft Assessment Order’ but was accompanied by notice of demand u/s 156 of the Act. The Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceedings. 8. In our considered opinion, assessment proceedings concluded

HERO MOTO CORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, DELHI

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), vide order dated 30.04.2021, at an income of Rs. 31,66,82,06,82 1-/- under the normal provisions and at book profit of Rs. 43,79,43,08,839 under section 1l5JB of the Act. Re: Transfer Pricing Adjustment under section 92CA relating to inter unit transfer 2. That

ROLLS-ROYCE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,DELHI vs. DCIT TP 3(2)(1), DELHI

The appeal is allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Pareek

disallowances of INR 6.96.67,905 to the total income filed the Appellant. Final assessment order is invalid 2. erred in passing the final assessment order dated 18 November 2021 by the Ld. AO u/s Section 143(3) r.w.s 144C(13) r.w.s 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act") pursuant to the directions passed

HERO MOTOCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), vide order, dated 20.02.2015, at an income of Rs. 9158,75,47,743/- as against the income of Rs. 1630,20,76,9847- returned by the appellant. 2. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in enhancing the value of closing inventory of raw materials & components and thereby

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

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

disallowance of Rs.1,14,36,265/- on account of depreciation on computers. 3. The Learned DCIT erred in fact and in law in making an addition of Rs.4,12,04,919/- being a difference in Arms length Price.” 2. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are : in compliance to the directions issued by ITAT

MOTHERSON SUMI SYSTEMS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2010-11

144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) in pursuance to the directions of Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (“DRP”) pertaining to the Assessment Year (“AY”) 2010-11. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law; Motherson Sumi Systems Limited vs. DCIT 1. That the Assessment

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

144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), vide order dated 30.01.2018, at an income of Rs. 5871,58,67,760/- under the normal provisions and at book profit of Rs. 1799,03,00,809 under section 115JB of the Act. 2. That the assessing officer / the Transfer Pricing Officer (the TPO) erred on facts

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

disallowance made by the assessee u/s 14A of the Act. 3. That the final assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act dated 26th July, 2022 is vitiated being bad in law being passed in 2 contradiction and complete ignorance of binding directions of the Id. DRP which is against the express provisions of section 144C(10

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

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, 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