MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

Transfer Pricing adjustment in respect of international transactions entered into during the year. 8. Briefly stated, the assessee is a subsidiary of Suzuki Motor Corporation, Japan with a 45.54% shareholding of the Government of India and is engaged in the manufacture and sale of passenger cars primarily for sale in Indian market. It also exports vehicles and spare part

VACHASPATI SHARMA,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD -4(1), GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Vachaspati Sharma Vs Ito Village – Hayatpur Garhi Ward-4 Harsaru, Hayatpur, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan No.Fnqps2021R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellants By Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate Sh. K.L. Pahwa, Advocate Respondent By Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 11/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/11/2024 Order Sh. Sudhir Kumar, Jm :

price of acquired land. It may be noted that the assessee is entitled to interest u/s 34 of Land Acquisition Act only if there is delay in payment of compensation on or before taking possession of the acquired land. He has further submitted that award of interest under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 discretionary and is determine

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

transfer pricing adjustments. In pursuance to the direction(s) of Ld. DRP, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) passed impugned assessment order on 20.01.2015 u/s 143(4) r.w.s 144C of the Act. Thereby, he assessed income of assessee company at Rs.4649,87,40,313/-. Thereafter, the AO passed a rectification order u/s 154 of the Act thereby after rectifying the error

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

transfer pricing adjustments. In pursuance to the direction(s) of Ld. DRP, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) passed impugned assessment order on 20.01.2015 u/s 143(4) r.w.s 144C of the Act. Thereby, he assessed income of assessee company at Rs.4649,87,40,313/-. Thereafter, the AO passed a rectification order u/s 154 of the Act thereby after rectifying the error

JAGPAL,GURUGRAM vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Naveen Chandra

145A. The PCIT further found that the AO did not make any inquiry with regard to the eligibility of the assessee for claiming exemption u/s 10(37). The PCIT therefore, invoking his revisional powers under Explanation 2 of section 263(1) of Page 2 of 16 ITA No. 2092/DEL/2024 [A.Y 2018-19] Jagpal Vs. The .PCIT the Act, held that

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed

transfer pricing adjustment simply on the ground that assessee has spent advertisement, marketing expenditure which is benefitting the brand/trademark of the AE would not be correct approach. Thus, this line of reasoning given by the TPO is rejected. 18 ITA Nos.889 & 890/Del./2021 ITA No.454/Del./2022 57. Thus, on the facts of the present case, it cannot be held that

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed

transfer pricing adjustment simply on the ground that assessee has spent advertisement, marketing expenditure which is benefitting the brand/trademark of the AE would not be correct approach. Thus, this line of reasoning given by the TPO is rejected. 18 ITA Nos.889 & 890/Del./2021 ITA No.454/Del./2022 57. Thus, on the facts of the present case, it cannot be held that

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed

transfer pricing adjustment simply on the ground that assessee has spent advertisement, marketing expenditure which is benefitting the brand/trademark of the AE would not be correct approach. Thus, this line of reasoning given by the TPO is rejected. 18 ITA Nos.889 & 890/Del./2021 ITA No.454/Del./2022 57. Thus, on the facts of the present case, it cannot be held that

BHIM SINGH,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD 1(3) , GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

145A(b) but directed the Assessing Officer to recomputed the income of Rs. 1,05,75,310/- after allowing a deduction of a sum equal to fifty percent of such income as per Section 57(iv) of the Act. 7. Now the aggrieved assessee is in appeal before us. 8. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee stated that

BIR SINGH,FARIDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Naveen Chandra

transfer received by such assessee on or after the 1st day of April, 2004. 21. From the study of law as it exists today, we are of the considered view that the legal position as deliberated by the ld counsel of the assessee has undergone a sea change in the present with the amendment brought in the statute in section

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

transfer of unlisted shares is related to an issue pertaining to lifting of corporate veil: or (iii) the transfer of unlisted shares is made along with the control and management of underlying business.” 7. The AO, in the present case, did not merely rely on the classification in books or duration of holding. Instead, the AO undertook a thorough analysis

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

transfer of unlisted shares is related to an issue pertaining to lifting of corporate veil: or (iii) the transfer of unlisted shares is made along with the control and management of underlying business.” 7. The AO, in the present case, did not merely rely on the classification in books or duration of holding. Instead, the AO undertook a thorough analysis

SH TECH PARK DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-22(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

transferred upon registration of sale deed. SUBSTANCE over FORM should prevail is also fundamental objective of Ind AS. 5.8 On perusal of appellant submission it is also observed that the appellant has not provided cogent reason for adopting new accounting policies and has also not provided any computation which indicates the effect of accounting policies on underlined real estate project

PRASANDI BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,MEERUT vs. ADDL. CIT, MEWAT

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2011-12

section 145 & 145A are applicable. It was submitted before the learned CIT(Appeals) that the assessee was following project completion method since the beginning and that could not be changed. He submitted that the learned CIT(Appeals) ought to have deleted the entire addition. 11. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that

ACIT, MEERUT vs. M/S. PRASANDI BUILDERS (P) LTD., MEERUT

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2011-12

section 145 & 145A are applicable. It was submitted before the learned CIT(Appeals) that the assessee was following project completion method since the beginning and that could not be changed. He submitted that the learned CIT(Appeals) ought to have deleted the entire addition. 11. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that