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)

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing the refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154.' ITA 196 Del 2013 Ranbaxy Laboratories limited V ACIT A.Y. 2008-09 Page 60 of 134 16. Equally illuminating are the following observations in Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. (supra) ". . . However

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

pricing of a product is a very subjective exercise and is true value, as received by the receiver, can differ from that received by others in the market place. Thus, CUP method requires a high degree of comparability along the following dimensions: (i) Quality of the product or service; (ii) Contractual terms (example, scope and terms of warranties provided, sale

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

pricing of a product is a very subjective exercise and is true value, as received by the receiver, can differ from that received by others in the market place. Thus, CUP method requires a high degree of comparability along the following dimensions: (i) Quality of the product or service; (ii) Contractual terms (example, scope and terms of warranties provided, sale

CIT vs. CUSHMAN AND WAKEFIELD INDIA PVT LTD

The appeal is partly allowed

Transfer Pricing Officer determined the arm's length price at nil under section 92CA(3). Hence this argument is devoid of merit.” Indeed, a Division Bench of this Court, in Sony India Pvt. Ltd. v. Central Board of Direct Taxes and Anr., [2007] 288 ITR 52 (Delhi) (albeit considering the law prior to the 2007 amendment to the Act), concurred

STERIA INDIA LTD.,NOIDA vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAQL RANGE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer price legislation. 3.3.2(2) For determining Top-up invoice: “Revenue" is defined as inclusive of (a) Revenue as per clause 3.3.1 (b) Foreign exchange currency gain/loss if any (c) Other income earned out of regular business operations and (d) Top-up value to arrive at agreed return. Non-operational and other income, if any will be excluded for determining

STERIA (INDIA) LTD.,NOIDA vs. ADDL. CIT, SPL. RANGE- 8 , NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer price legislation. 3.3.2(2) For determining Top-up invoice: “Revenue" is defined as inclusive of (a) Revenue as per clause 3.3.1 (b) Foreign exchange currency gain/loss if any (c) Other income earned out of regular business operations and (d) Top-up value to arrive at agreed return. Non-operational and other income, if any will be excluded for determining

M/S STERIA NDIA LTD.,,NOIDA vs. ADDL CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer price legislation. 3.3.2(2) For determining Top-up invoice: “Revenue" is defined as inclusive of (a) Revenue as per clause 3.3.1 (b) Foreign exchange currency gain/loss if any (c) Other income earned out of regular business operations and (d) Top-up value to arrive at agreed return. Non-operational and other income, if any will be excluded for determining

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

Transfer Pricing Officer (‘TPO’) and thus there could not be any ‘escapement of income’ 2.2 That the AO/DRP has erred in initiating reassessment

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

Transfer Pricing Officer (‘TPO’) and thus there could not be any ‘escapement of income’ 2.2 That the AO/DRP has erred in initiating reassessment

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

Transfer Pricing Officer (‘TPO’) and thus there could not be any ‘escapement of income’ 2.2 That the AO/DRP has erred in initiating reassessment

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

Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-section (3) of section 92CA; and [(ii) any non-resident not being a company, or any foreign company.] Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment

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

Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-section (3) of section 92CA; and [(ii) any non-resident not being a company, or any foreign company.] Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment

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

Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-section (3) of section 92CA; and [(ii) any non-resident not being a company, or any foreign company.] Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment

M/S. ASIAN HONDA MOTOR CO. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result additional ground raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiasian Honda Motor Co. Ltd, Dcit, C/O. Pds Legal Atmaram Int. Taxation Vs. Mansion, Office No. 7, First Floor, Kg Marg, New Delhi Pan:Aaica2531P (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment or fresh assessment as the case may be expires. He further submitted that therefore the date of limitation for passing of the transfer pricing

BMW INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2010-11 Bmw India Private Ltd. Vs. Dcit 7Th Floor, Tower-B, Building Circle-1(1) No. 8, Dlf Cyber City, Phase Gurgaon Ii, Gurgaon Pan:Aabcb7140C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Adv Department By : Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.11.2017 Order Per R.S. Syal, Vp: This Appeal By The Assessee Emanates From The Final Assessment Order Dated 24.02.2015 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144 C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961

Transfer Pricing Officer. …… ……. …. .’ 31. In the ultimate analysis, the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Knorr Bremse (surpa) remitted the matter for fresh adjudication by noting in para 3 of its judgment that : `The determination of the arm’s length price by the authorities is based on certain findings of law which we have dealt with in the judgment

DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), NEW DELHI vs. ADOBE SYSTEMS SOFTWARE IRELAND LTD., DUBLIN, IRELAND

In the result, appeals by the assessee stand allowed in terms of the above order and the Revenue’s appeal stand dismissed as above

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

reassessment orders passed by the Ld. AO after the pronouncement of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Limited (supra) i.e. for AY 2016-17, AY 2017-18, AY 2018-19, AY 2019- 20 and AY 2020-21, the Ld. AO has not alleged that the receipts

ADOBE SYSTEMS SOFTWARE IRELAND LTD.,IRELAND vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals by the assessee stand allowed in terms of the above order and the Revenue’s appeal stand dismissed as above

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

reassessment orders passed by the Ld. AO after the pronouncement of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Limited (supra) i.e. for AY 2016-17, AY 2017-18, AY 2018-19, AY 2019- 20 and AY 2020-21, the Ld. AO has not alleged that the receipts

ADOBE SYSTEMS SOFTWARE IRELAND LTD.,DUBLIN, IRELAND vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals by the assessee stand allowed in terms of the above order and the Revenue’s appeal stand dismissed as above

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

reassessment orders passed by the Ld. AO after the pronouncement of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Private Limited (supra) i.e. for AY 2016-17, AY 2017-18, AY 2018-19, AY 2019- 20 and AY 2020-21, the Ld. AO has not alleged that the receipts