COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. MOSER BAER INDIA LIMITED

The appeals are dismissed

10A and 10B of the Act, the depreciation in respect of these units had been deducted from its income. An explanation was sought from the Assessee in this regard. By its letter dated 8th January, 1999 the Assessee submitted that the claim for depreciation was a clerical mistake. The Assessee filed a revised computation. The Assessee filed a further application

SRF LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

10A(1A) of the Act. 60. In the result, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes with the direction that the Assessing Officer shall recompute the deduction as per law. 61. With regard to Ground No. 17 (b) and Additional Ground No.25 are interconnected therefore considered together. 62. Ground no.17(d) relates to the exclusion

SRF LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

10A(1A) of the Act. 60. In the result, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes with the direction that the Assessing Officer shall recompute the deduction as per law. 61. With regard to Ground No. 17 (b) and Additional Ground No.25 are interconnected therefore considered together. 62. Ground no.17(d) relates to the exclusion

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

u/s 10B of the Act in view of provision of section 10B(1) read with section 108(4) of the Act. 3. The Ld. DRP erred both on facts and in law in confirming the Ld. AO/TPO's action of making an adjustment of Rs. 8,09,277/- to the income of the Appellant by holding that the international transactions

VODAFONE IDEA LTD. (EARLIER KNWON AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.),MUMBAI vs. ACIT,. CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, all above said grounds are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shriyogesh Kumar U.S.Vodafone Idea Ltd Vs. Acit, (Earlier Known As Vodafone Circle-26(2), Mobile Services Ltd) New Delhi 10Th Floor, Birla Centurion, Century Mills Compound, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai, Maharastra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacb2100P

10A(a) to observe here that the expression 'comparable un- controlled transaction' signifies a transaction between enterprises other than associate ones; whether resident or non-resident. It has already come on record that the TPO in the instant case relied upon assessee's agreed price rate of US $ 161.20 per kg for Deltamethrin supply in order to make the impugned

AMQ AGRO INDIA PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-07, DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals of the above mentioned AYs are

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

10A of the Act. The assessee was searched under section 132(1) of the Act on 15th Feb, 2014 along with other assessees of AMQ Group. The consequential assessments of the above mentioned AYs were completed under section 153A of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment orders passed under section 153A of the Act in the above captioned

AMQ AGRO INDIA PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-07, DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals of the above mentioned AYs are

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

10A of the Act. The assessee was searched under section 132(1) of the Act on 15th Feb, 2014 along with other assessees of AMQ Group. The consequential assessments of the above mentioned AYs were completed under section 153A of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment orders passed under section 153A of the Act in the above captioned

AMQ AGRO INDIA PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-07, DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals of the above mentioned AYs are

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

10A of the Act. The assessee was searched under section 132(1) of the Act on 15th Feb, 2014 along with other assessees of AMQ Group. The consequential assessments of the above mentioned AYs were completed under section 153A of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment orders passed under section 153A of the Act in the above captioned

AMQ AGRO INDIA PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-07, DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals of the above mentioned AYs are

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

10A of the Act. The assessee was searched under section 132(1) of the Act on 15th Feb, 2014 along with other assessees of AMQ Group. The consequential assessments of the above mentioned AYs were completed under section 153A of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment orders passed under section 153A of the Act in the above captioned

AMQ AGRO INDIA PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-07, DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals of the above mentioned AYs are

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

10A of the Act. The assessee was searched under section 132(1) of the Act on 15th Feb, 2014 along with other assessees of AMQ Group. The consequential assessments of the above mentioned AYs were completed under section 153A of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment orders passed under section 153A of the Act in the above captioned

AMQ AGRO INDIA PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-07, DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals of the above mentioned AYs are

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

10A of the Act. The assessee was searched under section 132(1) of the Act on 15th Feb, 2014 along with other assessees of AMQ Group. The consequential assessments of the above mentioned AYs were completed under section 153A of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment orders passed under section 153A of the Act in the above captioned

AMQ AGRO INDIA PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-07, DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals of the above mentioned AYs are

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

10A of the Act. The assessee was searched under section 132(1) of the Act on 15th Feb, 2014 along with other assessees of AMQ Group. The consequential assessments of the above mentioned AYs were completed under section 153A of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment orders passed under section 153A of the Act in the above captioned

CONCENTRIX DAKSH SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act against the Appellant on account of the above adjustments made in the assessment order.” 3. The grounds to be adjudicated are, 1. Interest on receivables 2. Capitalization of wireless ports 3. Allocation of expenses 4. Capital reserves and 5. Employee compensation 6 Concentrix Daksh Services India

M/S. MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) which is premature at this stage and accordingly, the same is dismissed as such. 21. Ground No.7 is general in nature, hence the same is dismissed as such. 22. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA No.4789/Del/2014 for AY 2005-06 is partly allowed. 23. The assessee has filed appeal

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

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) which is premature at this stage and accordingly, the same is dismissed as such. 21. Ground No.7 is general in nature, hence the same is dismissed as such. 22. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA No.4789/Del/2014 for AY 2005-06 is partly allowed. 23. The assessee has filed appeal

MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) which is premature at this stage and accordingly, the same is dismissed as such. 21. Ground No.7 is general in nature, hence the same is dismissed as such. 22. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA No.4789/Del/2014 for AY 2005-06 is partly allowed. 23. The assessee has filed appeal

M/S IRCON SOMA TOLLWAY (P) LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT-4, NEW DELHI

The appeals are dismissed as\ninfructuous

penalty notice u/s 271(1)(c) for which\nthere was no direction u/s 263.\n5. The Ld. AO has grossly erred on facts as well as in law in\ncharging interest under various section of IT Act, 1961.\n6. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify and\nwithdraw any grounds before or during the course of\nappellate proceedings.”\nAppellant/assessee

M/S COLT TECHNOLOGY SERVICES (I) PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the ITA No

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

u/s 143(3) r/w Section 144C of Income tax Act, 1961(‘Act’ for short) for the Assessment Year 2010-11 and 2012-13 respectively. 2. The grounds of appeal in I.T.A. No. 536/DEL/2015 (A.Y 2010-11) are as under:- “1 The order dated November 28, 2014, passed by the Learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6(1), New Delhi