M/S PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ACIT,, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

145A of the Act. The assessee has not pressed this ground and therefore the same is not adjudicated. (v) In Ground No. 8, the assessee has challenged the adjustment made to book profit amounting to INR 70,30,540 (provisions for bad and doubtful debts) under section 115JB of the Act. The assessee has not pressed this ground

M/S PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ACIT,, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

145A of the Act. The assessee has not pressed this ground and therefore the same is not adjudicated. (v) In Ground No. 8, the assessee has challenged the adjustment made to book profit amounting to INR 70,30,540 (provisions for bad and doubtful debts) under section 115JB of the Act. The assessee has not pressed this ground

M/S. PEPSI FOODS LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

145A of the Act. The assessee has not pressed this ground and therefore the same is not adjudicated. (v) In Ground No. 8, the assessee has challenged the adjustment made to book profit amounting to INR 70,30,540 (provisions for bad and doubtful debts) under section 115JB of the Act. The assessee has not pressed this ground

PEPSI FOODS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

145A of the Act. The assessee has not pressed this ground and therefore the same is not adjudicated. (v) In Ground No. 8, the assessee has challenged the adjustment made to book profit amounting to INR 70,30,540 (provisions for bad and doubtful debts) under section 115JB of the Act. The assessee has not pressed this ground

M/S PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ACIT,, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

145A of the Act. The assessee has not pressed this ground and therefore the same is not adjudicated. (v) In Ground No. 8, the assessee has challenged the adjustment made to book profit amounting to INR 70,30,540 (provisions for bad and doubtful debts) under section 115JB of the Act. The assessee has not pressed this ground

PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 7, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

145A of the Act. The assessee has not pressed this ground and therefore the same is not adjudicated. (v) In Ground No. 8, the assessee has challenged the adjustment made to book profit amounting to INR 70,30,540 (provisions for bad and doubtful debts) under section 115JB of the Act. The assessee has not pressed this ground

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

transfer pricing adjustment simply on the ground that assessee has spent advertisement, marketing 51 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. 57. Thus, on the facts of the present case, it cannot be held that there was any kind of understanding

M/S. DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Sh. Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. Acit, 1711, S. P. Mukherjee Marg, Vs Central Circle – 29, Delhi-110006 New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd0132H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. R. S. Singhavi, Ca Sh. Satyajeet Goel, Ca Respondent By Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28/08/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/10/2020 Order

Transfer Pricing TPO : Adjustment in respect 7,80,19,356/ Page 91-96 loan is required to 15 benchmarking of Page 3-8 Para 4.2 - Para73- 77 benchmarked as per interest received on foreign currency loan LIBOR and TPO was DRP: not justified in Page 56 Para 18.3 applying SBI PLR. The adjustment was accordingly deleted. 7. The learned authorised

HERO MOTOCROP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2015-16

transfer pricing adjustment of Rs.1,87,74,679, by applying a markup of 7.69% and 7.03%, being the NP of Gurgaon and Dharuhera units respectively, to the purchases of Rs.17.72 crores and Rs.7.32 crores made by eligible unit from the respective non-eligible units by applying the provisions of section 80IA(8) read with section 80IC

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD.,, DELHI

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

price of interest received from loan advanced to associated enterprise by relying on TPO‘s order. (ii) That CIT(A), assessing officer and TPO has erred on facts and in law in applying interest rate of 16.31% p.a. on basis of SBI prime lending rate + 400bps on loan advanced by appellant to its wholly owned subsidiary, namely, DS Business

DE LA RUE CASH SYSTEMS INDIA P, LTD(PRESENTLY KNOWN AS - DE LA RUE CASH PROCESSING SOLUTINS P.LTD,GURGAON vs. ITO 1(1)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

section 92CA(4) r.w.s 92C(4) of the Act, it is as determined by the Transfer Pricing Officer as assessee’s income for the year. Accordingly made an additions of Rs.52,16,996/- to the returned income of the assessee. 5. The Assessing Officer made disallowance of provisions for warranty expenses amounting to Rs.2,08,11,781/-. The Assessing Officer

DE LA RUE CASH PROCESSING SOLUTION PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, GURGAON

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

section 92CA(4) r.w.s 92C(4) of the Act, it is as determined by the Transfer Pricing Officer as assessee’s income for the year. Accordingly made an additions of Rs.52,16,996/- to the returned income of the assessee. 5. The Assessing Officer made disallowance of provisions for warranty expenses amounting to Rs.2,08,11,781/-. The Assessing Officer

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

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

section 145A were not applicable as the assessment year under consideration was 1995-96. In view of the detailed discussion supra with reference to the applicability of section 145A to the year in question, there can be no escape from valuation of purchase, sale and inventories under the inclusive method. We, therefore, direct the AO to recast Profit and loss

HERO MOTOCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

prices with retrospective effect have always been accepted as revenue deduction, including payments made during the relevant year. Therefore according to him , during the relevant previous year, the appellant made aggregate provision of Rs. 6159.90 lacs, comprising of Provision for purchase orders issued for price amendment as at 31.3.2012 of Rs. 1034.90 lacs and Provision on estimated basis for price

CHANDER KALAN,DELHI vs. NEAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

transfer of the capital asset. The court considered the provisions of sections 23(1), 23(1-A) and section 23(2) of the Act as well as section 28 and section 34 of the Act of 1894 and observed that section 23(1- A) was introduced in the 1894 Act to mitigate the hardship caused to the owner

VEENA SHAH,PANIPAT vs. PR CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

transfer received by such assessee on or after the 1st day of April, 2004. 11. The amendment brought into Section 56 of the Act,vide Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 (with effect from 01.10.2010) [clause (viii) of sub- Section 2 to Section 56], relevant for deciding this caseis extracted hereunder: - 15 "56. Income from other sources: - (2) In particular and without

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