ARIBA INC,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT (INTL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

Price Waterhouse Coopers, International Taxation, Sucheta Bhawan, 11A, Circle 1 (1), Vishnu Digamber Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN : AAACD5883D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Himanshu Sinha, Advocate Shri Yash Varmani, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR 2 ITA Nos.4582 to 4584, 6090/Del./2010 ITA No.3923/Del./2012 ITA No.1538/Del./2013 ITA Nos.1469 & 1470/Del./2015 Date of Hearing

ARIBA INC,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT (INTL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

Price Waterhouse Coopers, International Taxation, Sucheta Bhawan, 11A, Circle 1 (1), Vishnu Digamber Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN : AAACD5883D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Himanshu Sinha, Advocate Shri Yash Varmani, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR 2 ITA Nos.4582 to 4584, 6090/Del./2010 ITA No.3923/Del./2012 ITA No.1538/Del./2013 ITA Nos.1469 & 1470/Del./2015 Date of Hearing

ARIBA INC.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

Price Waterhouse Coopers, International Taxation, Sucheta Bhawan, 11A, Circle 1 (1), Vishnu Digamber Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN : AAACD5883D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Himanshu Sinha, Advocate Shri Yash Varmani, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR 2 ITA Nos.4582 to 4584, 6090/Del./2010 ITA No.3923/Del./2012 ITA No.1538/Del./2013 ITA Nos.1469 & 1470/Del./2015 Date of Hearing

ARIBA INC.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

Price Waterhouse Coopers, International Taxation, Sucheta Bhawan, 11A, Circle 1 (1), Vishnu Digamber Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN : AAACD5883D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Himanshu Sinha, Advocate Shri Yash Varmani, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR 2 ITA Nos.4582 to 4584, 6090/Del./2010 ITA No.3923/Del./2012 ITA No.1538/Del./2013 ITA Nos.1469 & 1470/Del./2015 Date of Hearing

ARIBA INC.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

Price Waterhouse Coopers, International Taxation, Sucheta Bhawan, 11A, Circle 1 (1), Vishnu Digamber Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN : AAACD5883D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Himanshu Sinha, Advocate Shri Yash Varmani, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR 2 ITA Nos.4582 to 4584, 6090/Del./2010 ITA No.3923/Del./2012 ITA No.1538/Del./2013 ITA Nos.1469 & 1470/Del./2015 Date of Hearing

M/S. ARIBA INC.,GURGAON vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

Price Waterhouse Coopers, International Taxation, Sucheta Bhawan, 11A, Circle 1 (1), Vishnu Digamber Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN : AAACD5883D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Himanshu Sinha, Advocate Shri Yash Varmani, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR 2 ITA Nos.4582 to 4584, 6090/Del./2010 ITA No.3923/Del./2012 ITA No.1538/Del./2013 ITA Nos.1469 & 1470/Del./2015 Date of Hearing

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. INFRASOFT LTD

115A of the Act which specifically refers to cases where royalties are paid to non—resident for the transfer of all or any right (including the granting of the license) in respect of any computer software to a person resident in India. 2013:DHC:6018 ======================================================================= ITA 1034/2009 Page 22 of 174 4.8.4 A copy of software supplied by the appellant

ETHIOPIAN AIRLINES GROUP,EHIOPIA vs. ACIT INT. TAXATION CIRCLE-1(2)(2), DELHI

Transfer Pricing Officer that these payments were\nreimbursement in the hands of the assessee and the reimbursement\nwas accepted as such at arm's length. Once the character of the\npayment is found to be in the nature of reimbursement of the\nexpenses, it cannot be income chargeable to tax.\n10. Pertinently, the Revenue itself has given the benefit

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.

115A of the Act. Therefore, we direct the AO/TPO to delete the adjustment or attributions applied. In the result, grounds raised in this regard are allowed. 52. With regard to Ground No.7 regarding penalty proceedings under section 271AA of the Act, ld. AR submitted that in the transfer pricing order dated 08.06.2023 passed under section 92CA

ETHIOPIAN AIRLINES GROUP ,ETHIOPIA vs. ACIT, INT. TAXATION CIRCLE-1(2)(2), DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

115A of the Income-tax Act. On merit, assessee's grounds are basically two-fold. First, the contract agreement dated 15 May 2017 is between Flight Simulation Techniques Centre Pvt. Ltd, UAE (henceforth" FSTC, UAE") an affiliate of FSTI and the EA and not between FSTI and EA for providing training of pilots as the Bole International Airport, Adias Ababa

SABRE DECISION TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL LLC,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE 3(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

115A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 20. The ratio of the of ld. CIT(A) while reducing tax rate of 40% to 10% is as under: “4.3 Now the two fundamental questions remain to be addressed. 1. Whether the income of the assessee is in the nature of royalty under section 9(l)(vi) of the Act? 2. Whether

ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE 3(1)(2), NEW DELHI vs. SABRE DECISION TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL LLC, USA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

115A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 20. The ratio of the of ld. CIT(A) while reducing tax rate of 40% to 10% is as under: “4.3 Now the two fundamental questions remain to be addressed. 1. Whether the income of the assessee is in the nature of royalty under section 9(l)(vi) of the Act? 2. Whether

NETAPP B.V.,KARNATAKA vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(2)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmanetapp B. V. Vs. Dcit C/O. Mr. Krishna Kumar (International Taxation), Gv, Srbc & Associates Circle - 2(2)(2), Llp, 4Th Floor, A-Wing, New Delhi Divyasree Chambers, #11, O’’Shaughnessy Road, Langford Gardens, Bangaluru, Karnataka-560 025

B. V. Vs. DCIT C/o. Mr. Krishna Kumar (International Taxation), GV, SRBC & Associates Circle - 2(2)(2), LLP, 4th Floor, A-Wing, New Delhi Divyasree Chambers, #11, O’’Shaughnessy Road, Langford Gardens, Bangaluru, Karnataka-560 025 PAN No. AADCN 2178 C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Nageshwar Rao, Adv. Shri Deepika Agarwal, Adv. Revenue by Ms. Anupama Anand

LITTLE FAIRY LIMITED,NICOSIA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE INT. TAX. 2(2)(1), DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

115A of the Act. 11. On these undisputed facts, all that has to be decided is as to whether the Assessing Officer was justified in passing a draft assessment order when there is no variation in income 8 I.T.A. Nos. 1511 & 1512/Del/2022 or loss returned which is prejudicial to the interest of the assessee. 12. Section 144C(1

LITTLE FAIRY LTD,NICOSIA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2(2)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

115A of the Act. 11. On these undisputed facts, all that has to be decided is as to whether the Assessing Officer was justified in passing a draft assessment order when there is no variation in income 8 I.T.A. Nos. 1511 & 1512/Del/2022 or loss returned which is prejudicial to the interest of the assessee. 12. Section 144C(1

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,SAN DIEGO vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIVIC CENTRE MINTO ROAD

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri M. Balaganeshqualcomm Incorporated, Vs. Dcit, 5775, Morehouse Drive, Circle-3(1), San Diego, California, International Taxation, Usa, 92121, Usa New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacq1484H Assessee By : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Adv Shri Nishant Thakkar, Adv Ms. Jasmin Amalsadavala, Adv Shri Zoheb Balwani, Ca Revenue By: Shri Vijay B. Basanta, Cit Dr Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 14/11/2024

115A of the Act . The Learned AO also observed that the same would also be taxable at the rate of 10% in terms of India USA Tax Treaty. 9. The Learned DRP by placing reliance on its findings recorded in assessee’s own case for the Assessment Years 2014-15 and 2015-16 and facts being identical in this year

ERNST AND YOUNG U.S. LLP,UNITED STATES vs. ACIT, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 1(2)(2), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Ms. Madhumita Roy

1 (2)(2), Delhi (“Ld. AO”) in conjunction with the directions passed by the Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (“Ld. DRP”) in the case of Appellant for AY 2021-22, assessing the income of the Appellant for the relevant assessment year at INR 49,70,21,380 2 Ernst and Young U.S. LLP as against the returned income

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2022-23 is allowed for 14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganesh

115A of the Act . The Learned AO also observed that the same would also be taxable at the rate of 10% in terms of India USA Tax Treaty. 9. The Learned DRP by placing reliance on its findings recorded in assessee‟s own case for the Assessment Years 2014-15 and 2015-16 and facts being identical in this year