MCKINSEY KNOWLEDGE CENTRE INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 14 of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishimckinsey Knowledge Centre India Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Ltd, Circle-16(2) 3Rd Floor, Block-Iii, Vatika Business Park, New Delhi Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon Pan:Aaccm2356G (Appellant) (Respondent)

transfer pricing, the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in SAP Labs India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (2011) 44 SOT 156 (Bangalore) has held that foreign exchange fluctuation gain is part of operating profit of the company and should be included in the operating revenue. Similar view has been taken in Trilogy E Business Software India (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2014-15]

Section 92F(v) of the Income-tax Act states: "transaction includes an arrangement, understanding or action in concert, whether or not such arrangement, understanding or action is formal or in writing;" Similarly, Rule 10B(2)(c) states: “the contractual terms (whether or not such terms are formal or in writing) of the transactions which lay down explicitly or implicitly

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are allowed in the above terms, but with no orders as to costs

156. A Division Bench of Delhi High Court in the writ petition challenging the Transfer Pricing Order had dealt with transfer pricing issues and had enrolled and culled out legal ratios and principles. Directions were issued. At the same time, an order of remand to the TPO to compute the arm's length price on the basis of said principles

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are allowed in the above terms, but with no orders as to costs

156. A Division Bench of Delhi High Court in the writ petition challenging the Transfer Pricing Order had dealt with transfer pricing issues and had enrolled and culled out legal ratios and principles. Directions were issued. At the same time, an order of remand to the TPO to compute the arm's length price on the basis of said principles

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

transfer pricing adjustment of INR 5,93,54,095.  On 24.08.2021, the Respondent /AO directly passed the final assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act along with demand notice under section 156

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

transfer pricing adjustment of INR 5,93,54,095.  On 24.08.2021, the Respondent /AO directly passed the final assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act along with demand notice under section 156

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

transfer pricing adjustment of INR 5,93,54,095.  On 24.08.2021, the Respondent /AO directly passed the final assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act along with demand notice under section 156

STERIA (INDIA) LTD.,NOIDA vs. ADDL. CIT, SPL. RANGE- 8 , NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

price of the international transaction of IT services was determined by selecting 14 comparable companies whose average profit level indicator was 16.89%. Against this assessee is in appeal before us. 63. The first contention of the assessee is that there is an incorrect computation of operating profit margin of the assessee as foreign exchange income amounting

M/S STERIA NDIA LTD.,,NOIDA vs. ADDL CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

price of the international transaction of IT services was determined by selecting 14 comparable companies whose average profit level indicator was 16.89%. Against this assessee is in appeal before us. 63. The first contention of the assessee is that there is an incorrect computation of operating profit margin of the assessee as foreign exchange income amounting

STERIA INDIA LTD.,NOIDA vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAQL RANGE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

price of the international transaction of IT services was determined by selecting 14 comparable companies whose average profit level indicator was 16.89%. Against this assessee is in appeal before us. 63. The first contention of the assessee is that there is an incorrect computation of operating profit margin of the assessee as foreign exchange income amounting

CASIO INDIA COMPANY PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri C. M. Garg & Shri Prashant Maharishicasio India Company Pvt. Ltd, Dcit, 210, Okhla Industrial Estate Circle-3(1), Vs. (First Floor), Okhla Phase-Iii, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacc3448H (Appellant) (Respondent)

156 to 177. In Para No. 4.2 at page No. 5 of the order of the Ld. transfer pricing officer. He has nearly analyzed only one such agreement to set out the terms and conditions of such agreement. However, there is no finding in the order of the Ld. Transfer pricing officer with respect to the examination of the actual

LG ELECTRONICS INC., KOREA (LGEK),NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION , NEW DELHI

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer pricing officer (hereinafter referred to as ‘TPO’). The TPO vide order dated 29.10.2010 (page no. 745) made adjustments, inter alia, for relevant segment of import of raw material, components and spares and finished goods from the Appellant. The said adjustments were deleted by the Dispute Resolution Panel (hereinafter referred to as ‘DRP’) pursuant to which TPO passed appeal effect

M/S. LG ELECTRONICS INC., KOREA (LGEK),NOIDA vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NOIDA

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer pricing officer (hereinafter referred to as ‘TPO’). The TPO vide order dated 29.10.2010 (page no. 745) made adjustments, inter alia, for relevant segment of import of raw material, components and spares and finished goods from the Appellant. The said adjustments were deleted by the Dispute Resolution Panel (hereinafter referred to as ‘DRP’) pursuant to which TPO passed appeal effect

LG ELECTRONICS INC., KOREA (LGEK),NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- NOIDA, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

transfer pricing officer (hereinafter referred to as ‘TPO’). The TPO vide order dated 29.10.2010 (page no. 745) made adjustments, inter alia, for relevant segment of import of raw material, components and spares and finished goods from the Appellant. The said adjustments were deleted by the Dispute Resolution Panel (hereinafter referred to as ‘DRP’) pursuant to which TPO passed appeal effect

ANALJIT SINGH,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 16(2), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P.Kant

transfer price” of Rs. 1241.32 crores, which was a mutually negotiated and agreed consideration. Clause 3.2 of the said Agreement provided that the parties would request Kotak, a SEBI registered Category I merchant banker, to prepare a valuation report relating to the fair market value of VIL pursuant to Schedule 1 of the Framework Agreement dated 5.7.2007, to confirm

M/S. LUXOTTICA EYEWEAR INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2010-11 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Assessment Year : 2012-13

section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’). Since some of the issues raised in these appeals are common, we are, therefore, proceeding to dispose them off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12 2. The only issue raised by the assessee in its appeals for these

M/S LUXOTTICA INDIA EYEWEAR PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2010-11 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Assessment Year : 2012-13

section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’). Since some of the issues raised in these appeals are common, we are, therefore, proceeding to dispose them off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12 2. The only issue raised by the assessee in its appeals for these

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. LUXOTTICA INDIA EYEWEAR PVT. LTD., GURGAON

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

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2010-11 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Assessment Year : 2012-13

section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’). Since some of the issues raised in these appeals are common, we are, therefore, proceeding to dispose them off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12 2. The only issue raised by the assessee in its appeals for these