ETT LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS INDIAN EXPRESS MULTIMEDIA LTD),NEW DELHI vs. CIT, CENTRAL-II, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla & Sh. Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2013-14

68,662/- 4,92,42,252/- 4,92,42,252/- U/s 143 (3) dated 02.07.14 6 2013-14 1,61,37,41,713/ 161,36,85,293/ 161,36,293/- U/s 143 (3) dated 10.08.15 8. After referring to the aforesaid history, he submitted that in all the assessment years, the assessee’s claim for deduction

LM WIND POWER AS ,DENMARK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 2(2)(1), DELHI

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Lm Wind Power As, Vs, Acit, Circle Juptervej 6, 6000 Kolding, International Tax 2(2)(1), Denmark – 999999. Delhi (Pan :Aabcl8590Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate Shri Arpitgoyal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2025 Date Of Order : 21.11.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appealpreferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2025 Passed By The Acit, Circle Int. Tax 2(2)(1), Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2020-21 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessment Order Dated 29.07.2024 Passed Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (He Act") For Assessment Year 2020-21 Assessing The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.81,14, 14,893 Is Bad In Law, Void- Ab-Initio & Therefore, Liable To Be Quashed And/ Or Set Aside.

68. On an overall conspectus of the various decisions handed down by this Court as well as the Supreme Court insofar as Fixed Place PE and DAPE are concerned as well as the language of Article 5, we have no hesitation in 22 holding that the LO failed to meet the threshold requirements so as to constitute

PCIT-1, NEW DELHI vs. BEAM GLOBAL SPIRITS & WINE (INDIA) PVT. LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

92E, unless the context otherwise requires,— (i) "accountant" shall have the same meaning as in the Explanation below sub-section (2) of section 288; Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:07.03.2025 15:09:32 Signature Not Verified ITA 155/2022 & 156/2022 Page 5 of 38 (ii) "arm's length price" means a price which is applied or proposed

PCIT-1, NEW DELHI vs. BEAM GLOBAL SPIRITS & WINE (INDIA)PVT.LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

92E, unless the context otherwise requires,— (i) "accountant" shall have the same meaning as in the Explanation below sub-section (2) of section 288; Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:07.03.2025 15:09:32 Signature Not Verified ITA 155/2022 & 156/2022 Page 5 of 38 (ii) "arm's length price" means a price which is applied or proposed

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. BENETTON INDIA PVT. LTD.

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

68,024/- on account of payment of royalty. 13. Additionally, the learned CIT(A) also deleted the lease registration charges amounting to ₹30,31,188/-. 14. The Revenue preferred an appeal [being ITA 457/Del/2013] impugning the deletions made by the learned CIT(A) in respect of reimbursement of expenses towards expatriate salaries, royalty, and lease rental charges. The same were

AMADEUS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. Vijay Pal Rao & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-2, New Delhi M/S. Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., E- 9, Connaught House, Connaught Place, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca0364L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Respondent By Sh. H.S. Choudhary, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03.08.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 23.10.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.:

68 and 69 of the said order has noted that the assessee has not carried on any distribution functions though the agreement provided for same. The Tribunal further noted that DRP in the present case was motivated by the distribution part of the agreement which was not actually carried on by the assessee. The Tribunal also noted that the assessee

SURYA ROSHNI LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 7, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

92E and same is required to file electronically as defined in Rule 12. However, no such report is available on record. "if any person who has entered into an international transaction or specified domestic transaction and fails to furnish any such information as required by section 92D(3) of the Act, the AO may direct that such person shall

PERFETTI VAN MELLE INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1), GURGAON

In the result, the additional ground raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench “I-2”, New Delhi

92E, “international transaction” means a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non-residents, in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of tangible or intangible property, or provision of services, or lending or borrowing money, or any other transaction having a bearing on the profits, income, losses or assets of such enterprises

AMADEUS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 2(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA NO. 7691/Del/2017 stands allowed

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

92E, "international transaction" means a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non-residents, in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of 24 Stay No. 475, 476/d/2018& ITA no. 1662/d/2016 (Amadeus India P. Ltd.) tangible or intangible property, or provision of services, or lending or borrowing money, or any other transaction having

AMADEUS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA NO. 7691/Del/2017 stands allowed

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

92E, "international transaction" means a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non-residents, in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of 24 Stay No. 475, 476/d/2018& ITA no. 1662/d/2016 (Amadeus India P. Ltd.) tangible or intangible property, or provision of services, or lending or borrowing money, or any other transaction having

AMADEUS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA NO. 7691/Del/2017 stands allowed

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

92E, "international transaction" means a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non-residents, in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of 24 Stay No. 475, 476/d/2018& ITA no. 1662/d/2016 (Amadeus India P. Ltd.) tangible or intangible property, or provision of services, or lending or borrowing money, or any other transaction having

SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

68,561/- (i.e. Rs. 31,31,05,771/- under the non-IT segment and Rs. 8,12,62,790/- under the IT segment) by the Ld. DRP. 17. On this issue, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant assessee right at the onset submitted that the approach adopted by the TPO and the CIT(A) in respect of the AMP expenditure

SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

68,561/- (i.e. Rs. 31,31,05,771/- under the non-IT segment and Rs. 8,12,62,790/- under the IT segment) by the Ld. DRP. 17. On this issue, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant assessee right at the onset submitted that the approach adopted by the TPO and the CIT(A) in respect of the AMP expenditure

SANSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 8 , NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

68,561/- (i.e. Rs. 31,31,05,771/- under the non-IT segment and Rs. 8,12,62,790/- under the IT segment) by the Ld. DRP. 17. On this issue, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant assessee right at the onset submitted that the approach adopted by the TPO and the CIT(A) in respect of the AMP expenditure

SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

68,561/- (i.e. Rs. 31,31,05,771/- under the non-IT segment and Rs. 8,12,62,790/- under the IT segment) by the Ld. DRP. 17. On this issue, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant assessee right at the onset submitted that the approach adopted by the TPO and the CIT(A) in respect of the AMP expenditure

SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

68,561/- (i.e. Rs. 31,31,05,771/- under the non-IT segment and Rs. 8,12,62,790/- under the IT segment) by the Ld. DRP. 17. On this issue, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant assessee right at the onset submitted that the approach adopted by the TPO and the CIT(A) in respect of the AMP expenditure

SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

68,561/- (i.e. Rs. 31,31,05,771/- under the non-IT segment and Rs. 8,12,62,790/- under the IT segment) by the Ld. DRP. 17. On this issue, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant assessee right at the onset submitted that the approach adopted by the TPO and the CIT(A) in respect of the AMP expenditure

SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

68,561/- (i.e. Rs. 31,31,05,771/- under the non-IT segment and Rs. 8,12,62,790/- under the IT segment) by the Ld. DRP. 17. On this issue, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant assessee right at the onset submitted that the approach adopted by the TPO and the CIT(A) in respect of the AMP expenditure