COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. AMADEUS INDIA PVT LTD

Appeal is dismissed

144C of the said Act. 3. The Transfer Pricing Officer had observed that the assessee had incurred more than the normal sales and marketing expenses to build the “Amadeus” brand in India which was owned by Amadeus Spain. According to the Transfer 2011:DHC:6027-DB ITA 938/11 Page 3 of 20 Pricing Officer, the assessee should have been reimbursed

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BBC WORLD INDIA (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee and the learned assessing officer are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

2 (4), New Delhi passed draft assessment order dated 30/11/2009 u/s 143 read with section 144C of the act proposing an addition of Rs 22048880/– in pursuance of the direction of the learned dispute resolution panel where the transfer pricing

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

2) of the Act.  Assessing Officer (AO) passed draft assessment order (DAO) dated 21.03.2014 under section 143(3) read with section 144C, making addition of Rs.4,70,99,145, which included transfer pricing

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

2) of the Act.  Assessing Officer (AO) passed draft assessment order (DAO) dated 21.03.2014 under section 143(3) read with section 144C, making addition of Rs.4,70,99,145, which included transfer pricing

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

2) of the Act.  Assessing Officer (AO) passed draft assessment order (DAO) dated 21.03.2014 under section 143(3) read with section 144C, making addition of Rs.4,70,99,145, which included transfer pricing

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION- 2, NEW DELHI vs. HYUNDAI ROTEM COMPANY

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-section (3) of Section 92-CA; and (ii) any non-resident not being a company, or any foreign company.‖ 17. As is manifest from a reading of sub-section (13) of Section 144C of the Act, the AO is not accorded any discretion in the framing of an order of assessment once directions have

XANDER ADVISORS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub- section(3) of section 92CA of the Act. 11. Thus, if, we apply the provisions of section 144C of the Act to the facts of the present appeal, undoubtedly, assessee qualifies as an eligible assessee under sub-section (15)(b)(i) of section 144C of the Act. Further, it is an established fact

XANDER ADVISORS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub- section(3) of section 92CA of the Act. 11. Thus, if, we apply the provisions of section 144C of the Act to the facts of the present appeal, undoubtedly, assessee qualifies as an eligible assessee under sub-section (15)(b)(i) of section 144C of the Act. Further, it is an established fact

LI & FUNG INDIA PVT LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed and the order dated 25/11/11 of the ITAT Tribunal, Delhi Branch

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

section 144C(1) of the Act made an addition, inter alia, on account of transfer pricing adjustment of Rs. 57,65,61,186 on the basis of the order passed by the TPO. The reasoning of the TPO is as follows: ITA 306/2012 Page 5 “5.2.5 The compensation model of the assessee does not include the profit attributable

TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL & CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-25(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalteva Pharmaceutical & Chemical Vs Assessment Unit, Income Industries India Private Limited, Tax Department/Deputy 8Th Floor, C-Wing Time Square, Commissioner Of Income Andherikurla Road, Marol Naka, Tax, Circle 25(1), Opp Mittal Industrial Estate C. R. Building, Delhi- Andheri (E), Mumbai 400059, 110001 Maharashtra, India Pan: Bnspk7225H Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Sachit Jolly, Sr. Adv, Sh. Sohamdua, Adv& Sh. Abhiudaya Shankar Bajpai, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Final Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.

Transfer Pricing Officer under Section 92CA of the Act: consequently, the limitation to pass the Final Assessment Order was extended by 12 months under Section 153(4) of the Act. 4 Objections filed by the Appellant before the 27.10.2023 Dispute Resolution Panel in Form 35A within 30 days of receipt of the draft order. in compliance with Section 144C(2

FRESENIUS KABI ONCOLOGY LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-9(3), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Manish Agarwalfresenius Kabi Oncology Ltd. Income Tax Officer, B-310, Som Dutt Chamber, Ward-9(3), Bhikaji Cama Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110066. Pan-Aabcd7720L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-section (3) of section 92-CA; and (ii) any foreign company.’ 7. A reference is also made to the provisions of section 144B relating to the faceless assessment pertaining to the assessment completed in case of eligible assessee u/s 144C of the Act, the relevant provisions are as under: Fresenius Kabi Oncology

CIT vs. CUSHMAN AND WAKEFIELD INDIA PVT LTD

The appeal is partly allowed

2) of the Act, and was processed under Section 143(1). Since the assessee had entered into international transactions, the AO referred the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (“TPO”) under Section 92CA(3) of the Act for determination of the arm’s length price (“ALP”) of the transactions. The TPO by an order recommended an increase in the taxable

ARIBA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-section (3) of section 92-CA; and (ii) any foreign company.’ 9. A reference is also made to the provisions of section 144B relating to the faceless assessment pertaining to the assessment completed in case of eligible assessee u/s 144C of the Act, which are as under: Ariba India Pvt.Ltd. vs. ACIT “144B.Faceless Assessment

DCM SHRIIRAM LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 3 , NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

144C of the Act dated 31 October 2018 is bad in law. 1.3 That the additions/disallowances made by Ld. AO are wholly illegal, untenable and on erroneous grounds. GROUNDS OF APPEALS IN RESPECT OF TRANSFER PRICING ADJUSTMENTS Transfer of power-Rs. 26,52,98,490/- 2. That the Ld. DRP/TPO/AO have erred in law and facts and in circumstances

XL INDIA BUSINESS SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

144C(2) of the Act (Time Limit for passing Draft Assessment Order) Time limit to Draft Order Atleast ten month end of time limit to complete assessment proceedings 30.11.2022 29.09.2023 (draft order) Section 92CA(3A) of the Act (Time Limit for passing order of Transfer Pricing

NOBLE RESOURCE & TRADING INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed with above direction

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer pricing officer, The learned AO passed order in terms of section 144C (1) of the act on 07/03/2014 determining total loss of INR 359068286 against the returned income of the assessee of loss of INR 2602874. From the above, He reduced the brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation amounting to INR 36747130. Consequently the total loss was determined

NOBLE RESOURCES & TRADING INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed with above direction

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer pricing officer, The learned AO passed order in terms of section 144C (1) of the act on 07/03/2014 determining total loss of INR 359068286 against the returned income of the assessee of loss of INR 2602874. From the above, He reduced the brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation amounting to INR 36747130. Consequently the total loss was determined

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. I ENERGIZER HOLDINGS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed and consequently the appeals of the revenue are liable to be dismissed

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

144C of the Act, ‘eligible assessee’ means any person in whose case the variation referred to in CO Nos. 353 to 356 & Others/Del/2015 Rolland Enterprises Ltd. & Others . sub-Section (1) arises as a consequence of the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-Section (3) of Section 92CA of the Act. Explanatory Note to Finance (No. 2