M/S. NEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishinew Delhi Television Ltd, Vs. Acit, 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase- Circle-13(1), Iii, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. New Delhi Television Ltd, Circle-13(1), 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent)

92C, the Assessing Officer has to compute total income of the assessee having regard to the arm's length price so determined by the TPO." 7. In view of the guidelines issued by the CBDT in Instruction No.3/2003 the Tribunal was right in observing that by not making reference to the TPO, the Assessing Officer had breached the mandatory instructions

DCIT CIRCLE-10(1), NEW DELHI vs. HTC INDIA PVT LTD, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

3 HTC India Pvt. Ltd. 7. On this issue, we are guided by the various judgments. Applicability of the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act to the TP adjustments also came up for consideration before the ITAT Delhi. In the case of Mitsui Prime Advanced Composite India Pvt. Ltd. [2016-TII-234-ITAT- DEL-TP], after considering

MITSUI PRIME ADVANCED COMPOSITES INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Shri C.M. Garg, Jm Assessment Year : 2010-11

3 with Maruti Suzuki Ltd. to it along with consultancy services, against payment of BAHT 22396805 (converted into Indian rupee at Rs.3.14 crore). 4. As regards the international transaction of ‘Availing of engineering support services’ with transacted value of Rs.13,03,786/-, the TPO required the assessee to furnish information with regard to nature of such services availed

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, vs. SINOSTEEL INDIA PVT. LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

92C of the IT Act 1961 and lathe manner prescribed under that section in good faith and with due diligence. In view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that the assessee has concealed particulars of its income and is liable to penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act 1961.” The Assessing Officer, in our view

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MMTC LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 3378/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S Mmtc Ltd., Tax, Circle-5(1), Core 1, Scope Complex, 7 New Delhi-110002 Institutional Area, Lodhi Road, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm1433E Assessee By : Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. & Ms. Deepashree Rao, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.05.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 14.03.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Viii, New Delhi.

271 G were recommended. 7. The AO however did not find merit in the submissions of the assessee and levied the penalty of Rs.46,82,26,600/- u/s 271G of the Act by observing as under: 9 MMTC Ltd. “1. The assessee has contended that the TP report had been signed by the Auditors on 16.09.2009 to prove that

BT E- SERV (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal No. 99/Del/2016 filed by the assessee for assessment year 2011 – 12 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi & Bt E-Serv (India) Pvt. Ltd, Ito, 11Th Floor, Eros Corporate Tower, Ward-5(2), Vs. Nehru Place, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aadcb2533M (Appellant) (Respondent)

penalty proceedings under section 271 (1) ( c) of the income tax act. No specific arguments were advanced against this action of the Ld. assessing officer and as such this ground is premature, hence dismissed. 28. Ground No. 24 of the appeal of the assessee is against levy of interest under section 234B and 234D of the income

TREND MICRO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-25(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2013-14 Trend Micro India Private Limited, Vs Acit, 10Th Floor, Eros Corporate Tower, Circle-25(2), Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aacct2082Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate & Shri S.S. Tomar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2024

u/s 92C of the Act. Under Explanation-7 to section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, an addition or disallowance made while computing the income under section 92C of the 3 Act is deemed to be concealed income or income for which inaccurate particulars have been furnished. Expianation-7, however, states that penalty

M/S. GAP INTERNATIONAL SOURCING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.Prashant Maharishi

3. The Ld. Sr. DR relying upon the consistent orders of the Revenue submitted that penalty was leviable in terms of Explanation 7 of Section 271(1)(c) and considering these very facts and submissions the penalty levied by the AO has been confirmed by the CIT(A). Carrying us through the findings of the respective authorities

M/S CEVA FREIGHT (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ACIT, GURGAON

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit (Now Merged With Ceva Logistics Circle-1(1), Gurgaon India Private Limited W.E.F. April, 5Th Floor, Hsiidc Building, 1, 2016 Vide Order Dated Vanijya Nikunj, Udyog November 9, 2017 Of National Vihar, Phase-V Company Law Tribunal) Gurgaon Sewa Tower, Plot No. 19, Sectdor- 18, 2Nd Floor, Block, C, Maruti Industrial Complex, Udyog Vihar Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Respondent) (Appellant) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit Sewa Tower, Plot No. 19, Sectdor- Circle-1(1), 18, 5Th Floor, Hsiidc Building, 2Nd Floor, Block, C, Maruti Vanijya Nikunj, Udyog Industrial Complex, Udyog Vihar Vihar, Phase-V Gurgaon Aaacc2674H Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit Formerly Known As Egl Eagle Circle 1(1) Global Logistic (India) Pvt. Ltd. Gurgaon 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building No. 10 Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber (Respondent) City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Appellant) Vs Dcit Formerly Known As Egl Eagle Circle 11(1) Global Logistic (India) Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building No. 10 Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber (Respondent) City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Appellant) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building Circle 1(1) No. 10, Gurgaon Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Respondent) (Appellant)

92C (2) of the Act, while determining the arm's length price of the international transactions of the Appellant. 1.13. By misconstruing the function, asset and risk profile of the Appellant and erred by not allowing suitable adjustments to the margins of the comparable companies. Corporate Tax Adjustment - Rs. 100,000 2. The Ld. AO has grossly erred in making

CEVA FREIGHT INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit (Now Merged With Ceva Logistics Circle-1(1), Gurgaon India Private Limited W.E.F. April, 5Th Floor, Hsiidc Building, 1, 2016 Vide Order Dated Vanijya Nikunj, Udyog November 9, 2017 Of National Vihar, Phase-V Company Law Tribunal) Gurgaon Sewa Tower, Plot No. 19, Sectdor- 18, 2Nd Floor, Block, C, Maruti Industrial Complex, Udyog Vihar Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Respondent) (Appellant) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit Sewa Tower, Plot No. 19, Sectdor- Circle-1(1), 18, 5Th Floor, Hsiidc Building, 2Nd Floor, Block, C, Maruti Vanijya Nikunj, Udyog Industrial Complex, Udyog Vihar Vihar, Phase-V Gurgaon Aaacc2674H Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit Formerly Known As Egl Eagle Circle 1(1) Global Logistic (India) Pvt. Ltd. Gurgaon 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building No. 10 Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber (Respondent) City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Appellant) Vs Dcit Formerly Known As Egl Eagle Circle 11(1) Global Logistic (India) Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building No. 10 Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber (Respondent) City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Appellant) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building Circle 1(1) No. 10, Gurgaon Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Respondent) (Appellant)

92C (2) of the Act, while determining the arm's length price of the international transactions of the Appellant. 1.13. By misconstruing the function, asset and risk profile of the Appellant and erred by not allowing suitable adjustments to the margins of the comparable companies. Corporate Tax Adjustment - Rs. 100,000 2. The Ld. AO has grossly erred in making

M/S. CEVA FREIGHT (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit (Now Merged With Ceva Logistics Circle-1(1), Gurgaon India Private Limited W.E.F. April, 5Th Floor, Hsiidc Building, 1, 2016 Vide Order Dated Vanijya Nikunj, Udyog November 9, 2017 Of National Vihar, Phase-V Company Law Tribunal) Gurgaon Sewa Tower, Plot No. 19, Sectdor- 18, 2Nd Floor, Block, C, Maruti Industrial Complex, Udyog Vihar Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Respondent) (Appellant) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit Sewa Tower, Plot No. 19, Sectdor- Circle-1(1), 18, 5Th Floor, Hsiidc Building, 2Nd Floor, Block, C, Maruti Vanijya Nikunj, Udyog Industrial Complex, Udyog Vihar Vihar, Phase-V Gurgaon Aaacc2674H Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit Formerly Known As Egl Eagle Circle 1(1) Global Logistic (India) Pvt. Ltd. Gurgaon 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building No. 10 Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber (Respondent) City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Appellant) Vs Dcit Formerly Known As Egl Eagle Circle 11(1) Global Logistic (India) Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building No. 10 Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber (Respondent) City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Appellant) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building Circle 1(1) No. 10, Gurgaon Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Respondent) (Appellant)

92C (2) of the Act, while determining the arm's length price of the international transactions of the Appellant. 1.13. By misconstruing the function, asset and risk profile of the Appellant and erred by not allowing suitable adjustments to the margins of the comparable companies. Corporate Tax Adjustment - Rs. 100,000 2. The Ld. AO has grossly erred in making

CEVA FREIGHT (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, GURGAON

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit (Now Merged With Ceva Logistics Circle-1(1), Gurgaon India Private Limited W.E.F. April, 5Th Floor, Hsiidc Building, 1, 2016 Vide Order Dated Vanijya Nikunj, Udyog November 9, 2017 Of National Vihar, Phase-V Company Law Tribunal) Gurgaon Sewa Tower, Plot No. 19, Sectdor- 18, 2Nd Floor, Block, C, Maruti Industrial Complex, Udyog Vihar Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Respondent) (Appellant) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit Sewa Tower, Plot No. 19, Sectdor- Circle-1(1), 18, 5Th Floor, Hsiidc Building, 2Nd Floor, Block, C, Maruti Vanijya Nikunj, Udyog Industrial Complex, Udyog Vihar Vihar, Phase-V Gurgaon Aaacc2674H Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit Formerly Known As Egl Eagle Circle 1(1) Global Logistic (India) Pvt. Ltd. Gurgaon 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building No. 10 Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber (Respondent) City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Appellant) Vs Dcit Formerly Known As Egl Eagle Circle 11(1) Global Logistic (India) Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building No. 10 Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber (Respondent) City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Appellant) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building Circle 1(1) No. 10, Gurgaon Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Respondent) (Appellant)

92C (2) of the Act, while determining the arm's length price of the international transactions of the Appellant. 1.13. By misconstruing the function, asset and risk profile of the Appellant and erred by not allowing suitable adjustments to the margins of the comparable companies. Corporate Tax Adjustment - Rs. 100,000 2. The Ld. AO has grossly erred in making

CEVA FREIGHT (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, GURGAON

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit (Now Merged With Ceva Logistics Circle-1(1), Gurgaon India Private Limited W.E.F. April, 5Th Floor, Hsiidc Building, 1, 2016 Vide Order Dated Vanijya Nikunj, Udyog November 9, 2017 Of National Vihar, Phase-V Company Law Tribunal) Gurgaon Sewa Tower, Plot No. 19, Sectdor- 18, 2Nd Floor, Block, C, Maruti Industrial Complex, Udyog Vihar Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Respondent) (Appellant) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit Sewa Tower, Plot No. 19, Sectdor- Circle-1(1), 18, 5Th Floor, Hsiidc Building, 2Nd Floor, Block, C, Maruti Vanijya Nikunj, Udyog Industrial Complex, Udyog Vihar Vihar, Phase-V Gurgaon Aaacc2674H Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit Formerly Known As Egl Eagle Circle 1(1) Global Logistic (India) Pvt. Ltd. Gurgaon 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building No. 10 Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber (Respondent) City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Appellant) Vs Dcit Formerly Known As Egl Eagle Circle 11(1) Global Logistic (India) Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building No. 10 Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber (Respondent) City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Appellant) Ceva Freight India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit 1St Floor, Tower C, Dlf Building Circle 1(1) No. 10, Gurgaon Dlf Phase-Ii, Dlf Cyber City, Gurgaon Aaacc2674H (Respondent) (Appellant)

92C (2) of the Act, while determining the arm's length price of the international transactions of the Appellant. 1.13. By misconstruing the function, asset and risk profile of the Appellant and erred by not allowing suitable adjustments to the margins of the comparable companies. Corporate Tax Adjustment - Rs. 100,000 2. The Ld. AO has grossly erred in making

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. KYUNGSHIN INDUSTRIAL MOTHERSON LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2003-04

3) dated 31.12.2012 after considering the order of TPO and addition amounting to Rs. 1,31,22,205/- was made to the total income of the assessee. No objection/appeal was filed by the assessee against the aforesaid fresh order. 8. Penalty proceedings were subsequently initiated u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act in respect of addition of Rs.l

GENPACT INFRASTRUCTURE (HYDERABAD) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

92C of the Act were satisfied in the present case and no grounds existed for levy of penalty. 3 ITA No.6588/Del./2016 6. That the Ld. AO grossly erred on facts and in law in concluding that the appellant had furnished inaccurate particulars of its income. a) That the Ld. AO grossly failed to bring any material on record, which

LG ELECTRONICS INC., KOREA (LGEK),NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION , NEW DELHI

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

penalty under section 271 (1 )(c) of the Act and alleging that the Appellant has concealed the true and correct particulars of its taxable income and furnished inaccurate particulars of its income.” 11. The first assessment order out of the aforementioned batch of appeals was passed for AY 2007-08 and therefore the said assessment year is taken

M/S. LG ELECTRONICS INC., KOREA (LGEK),NOIDA vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NOIDA

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

penalty under section 271 (1 )(c) of the Act and alleging that the Appellant has concealed the true and correct particulars of its taxable income and furnished inaccurate particulars of its income.” 11. The first assessment order out of the aforementioned batch of appeals was passed for AY 2007-08 and therefore the said assessment year is taken

LG ELECTRONICS INC., KOREA (LGEK),NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- NOIDA, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

penalty under section 271 (1 )(c) of the Act and alleging that the Appellant has concealed the true and correct particulars of its taxable income and furnished inaccurate particulars of its income.” 11. The first assessment order out of the aforementioned batch of appeals was passed for AY 2007-08 and therefore the said assessment year is taken

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

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2011-12 Viavi Solutions India P. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle 13(1) (Formerly Known As Jdsu India New Delhi P.Ltd.) Infotech Centre, 3Rd Floor 14/2 Milestone, Delhi Gurgaon Road Gurgaon 122 016 Pan: Aaacw0654M Ay: 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 13(2) Vs. Jdsu India P.Ltd. New Delhi (Presently Known As Viavi Solutions India P. Ltd.) New Delhi Ay: 2012-13 Viavi Solutions India P. Ltd. Vs. Acit, Circle 26(1) (Formerly Known As Jdsu India New Delhi P.Ltd.) Infotech Centre, 3Rd Floor 14/2 Milestone, Delhi Gurgaon Road Gurgaon 122 016 Pan: Aaacw0654M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Nageswar Rao, Adv. Sh. Sandeep Karhail, Adv. & Sh. Shatani K Chakraborty Department By : Sh. H.K.Chaudhary, Cit-Dr

92C(3) of the Act. 4. The learned AO / TPO / DRP have erred by not accepting the economic analysis undertaken by the Appellant in accordance with the provisions of the Act read with the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (“the Rules”) and modifying the same for determination of arm’s length price (“ALP”) of the impugned transaction and holding that