SONY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-22(2), DELHI

The appeals are allowed partly with consequence to\nfollow as per the determination of grounds as above

transfer pricing\nand corporate tax issues. The assessee being an eligible assessee as per\nprovisions of section 144C of the Act filed objections before the DRP against the\ntransfer pricing variations proposed to be made by AO in the draft assessment\norder.\n\n4.2 Now we find that that the details of international transactions undertaken\nduring financial year

SONY INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-24(1), NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed partly with consequence to\nfollow as per the determination of grounds as above

transfer pricing\nand corporate tax issues. The assessee being an eligible assessee as per\nprovisions of section 144C of the Act filed objections before the DRP against the\ntransfer pricing variations proposed to be made by AO in the draft assessment\norder.\n\n4.2 Now we find that that the details of international transactions undertaken\nduring financial year

HONDA MOTORCYCLE AND SCOOTER INDIA PVT. LTD. ,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), GURUGRAM

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

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member)

transfer pricing adjustment relating to model fee paid for strips and color change : The TPO/DRP have made the aforesaid disallowance by holding that model fee paid by the assessee to its AE is nothing but in the nature of royalty which is already paid separately to the AE. It was held that the model fee appearing as a separate transaction

NDTV WORLDWIDE LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT 18(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharmandtv Worldwide Ltd, Vs. Dcit, Okhla Industrial Estate, Circle-18(1), Phase-Ii, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccn9121G

234 B of the Act.” That the appellant seeks leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any ground of appeal before or at the time of hearing of this appeal.” 8. Heard and perused the record. 9. On behalf of the appellant, arguments were raised primarily recapitulating the facts as narrated above. In regard to ground

INNOVATIVE TEXTILES LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Innovative Textiles Limited, Vs. Dcit, Circle 10(1), 81, Vighyan Vihar, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 092. (Pan : Aaaci0473J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2025 Date Of Order : 24.09.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against Assessment Order Dated 26.03.2022 Passed By The Income Tax Department/National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi U/S 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13)/144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2017-18 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That The Orders Of The Learned Lower Tax Authorities Is/Are Contrary To The Law & Facts Of The Case.

234 D of the Income - tax Act, 1961; h. That the lower tax authorities be directed to drop penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Income - tax Act, 1961.” 2. At the time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee pressed the issue in Ground No.3 only. In this regard, he submitted that the TPO has raised TP adjustment

M/S. SERCO INDIA PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. DCIT, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 2241/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Serco India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No. 94-95, Udyog Vihar, Phase- Circle-4(1), Iv, Gurgaon-122016 Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs6704P Assessee By : Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Radha Katyal Narang, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.05.2022

section 234 A, 234B & 234C of the Act.” 3. The appeal is against addition of Rs. 1,66,43,316/- on account of upward adjustment in arm’s length price of the appellant’s international transaction related to providing IT services to its AEs. 4. The assessee, Serco India Private Limited, is a subsidiary of Serco Group PLC, UK, incorporated

RICS INDIA PRIVATE LTD. ,HARYANA vs. DCIT CIRCLE-3(1), HARYANA

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmarics India Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Additional/ Joint/ Deputy/ Gf-17, Ground Floor, Assistant Commissioner Of Block B, Vatika Atrium Income Tax/ Income-Tax Centre 53, Gurgaon Officer, National Faceless 122002 Assessment Centre, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aafcr7432K

transfer pricing adjustment made in the sum of Rs 49,07,766/- qua these two transactions deserve to be deleted. Accordingly, the Ground Nos. 10 to 12 raised by the assessee are hereby allowed. 9. The Ground No. 13 raised by the assessee is challenging the levy of interest under section 234A of the Act. The learned AO is directed

HONDA R&D (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareekhonda R&D (India) Private Limited, Vs. Dcit, Circle 10(1), Technical Centre Plot No.2, Delhi. Sector 3, Imt Manesar, Gurugram – 122 052 (Haryana). (Pan : Aabch3071N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nageshwar Rao, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dharm Veer Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.10.2025 Date Of Order : 08.10.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman:

transfer pricing legislation which only allows challenges to the AE's profit margin, not the full reimbursed amount. 6.3 The Impugned Order erred in arbitrary selection of Other method as a Most appropriate method in the present case. NIL as ALP was mere Ipse dixit of TPO. 6.4 The Impugned Order erred in making the impugned adjustment without presenting

MAVENIR INDIA PVT. LTD. (EARLIER KNOWN AS COMVERSE NETWORK SYSTEM INDIA PVT. LTD.),GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1), GURGOAN

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Anadee Nath Misshrar Assessment Year: 2016-17

section 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) is erroneous and bad in law; Grounds of objections relating to Transfer Pricing Matters 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, & in law the reference made by the Ld. AO to the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Transfer pricing officer

ACIT-CIRCLE-3(1), GURGAON vs. TERADATA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, GURGAON

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

Transfer Pricing Grounds 3. That on facts of the case and in law, the Hon'ble DRP/ Learned TPO/ Learned AO have erred in rejecting the economic analysis undertaken by the Appellant by conducting a fresh economic analysis for the impugned transaction. ITA Nos. 1248 & 2337/Del/2022 (A) ITA Nos. 1430/Del/2022 (R) Teradata India Pvt. Ltd 4. That on facts

TERADATA INDIA P.LTD,GURUGRAM vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-3(1), GURUGRAM

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

Transfer Pricing Grounds 3. That on facts of the case and in law, the Hon'ble DRP/ Learned TPO/ Learned AO have erred in rejecting the economic analysis undertaken by the Appellant by conducting a fresh economic analysis for the impugned transaction. ITA Nos. 1248 & 2337/Del/2022 (A) ITA Nos. 1430/Del/2022 (R) Teradata India Pvt. Ltd 4. That on facts

TERADATA INDIA PVT LTD,GRUGRAM vs. DCIT CIRCLE-3(1), GURUGRAM

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

Transfer Pricing Grounds 3. That on facts of the case and in law, the Hon'ble DRP/ Learned TPO/ Learned AO have erred in rejecting the economic analysis undertaken by the Appellant by conducting a fresh economic analysis for the impugned transaction. ITA Nos. 1248 & 2337/Del/2022 (A) ITA Nos. 1430/Del/2022 (R) Teradata India Pvt. Ltd 4. That on facts

MICROSOFT INDIA (R&D) PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2016-17

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144C(13)/143(3A)/143(3B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) pursuant to the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). 2 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of the appeal before the Tribunal:- “1. Orders passed by Transfer Pricing Officer

ADOBE SYSTEMS INDIA P.LTD,NOIDA vs. DCIT, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO). TPO passed an order u/s 92CA(3) on 14.01.2021 which was received by the AO on 18.02.2021. Pursuant to the draft assessment order passed by the AO, assessee filed objections before the DRP. DRP gave its directions dated 10.01.2022. The said order was subject to giving effect by the TPO and the TPO passed the order

UOP INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 18(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

section 234B of the Act.” 3. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- (i) Whether the CIT(A) was justified in rejecting high margin comparables contested by the taxpayer and allowing to retain other low margin comparable in the final set of the TPO not opposed by the taxpayer, which were discharging similar nature of functions even while

BOMBARDIER TRANSPORTATION GMMH,NEW DELHI vs. ADDLDIRECOOOTOR OF INOMCE-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),RANGE-1,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraआअसं.5732/धिल्ली/2011(नि.व. 2008-09) Bombardier Transportation Gmbh, C/O M/S. Bombardier Transportation India Ltd., 3Rd Floor, B-Wing, Somdutt Chambers-I, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcb-4031-C बिाम Vs. Assistant Director Of Income Tax, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 1(1), New Delhi आअसं.4547/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2009-10) Bombardier Transportation Gmbh, C/O M/S. Bombardier Transportation India P. Ltd., Asset No. 2, 3Rd Floor, Novotel- Pullman Commercial Tower, Aero City, Delhi International Airport, New Delhi 110037 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcb-4031-C बिाम Vs. Assistant Director Of Income Tax, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 1(1), New Delhi आअसं.4511/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2009-10) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (International Taxation), R. No. 409, E-2 Block, 4Th Floor, Civic Centre, Near Minto Road, ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant New Delhi बिाम Vs. Bombardier Transportation Gmbh, C/Co Asa & Associates, K S House 118, Shahpur Jat, New Delhi 110049 ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aadcb-4031-C

section 234B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). 5. The Ld AO grossly erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) of the act for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.” Factual Matrix: 4. The assessee is a company incorporated in Germany and is a tax resident of Germany. The assessee is engaged

DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(2), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI vs. BOMBARDIER TRANSPORTATION GMBH, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraआअसं.5732/धिल्ली/2011(नि.व. 2008-09) Bombardier Transportation Gmbh, C/O M/S. Bombardier Transportation India Ltd., 3Rd Floor, B-Wing, Somdutt Chambers-I, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcb-4031-C बिाम Vs. Assistant Director Of Income Tax, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 1(1), New Delhi आअसं.4547/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2009-10) Bombardier Transportation Gmbh, C/O M/S. Bombardier Transportation India P. Ltd., Asset No. 2, 3Rd Floor, Novotel- Pullman Commercial Tower, Aero City, Delhi International Airport, New Delhi 110037 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcb-4031-C बिाम Vs. Assistant Director Of Income Tax, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Circle 1(1), New Delhi आअसं.4511/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2009-10) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (International Taxation), R. No. 409, E-2 Block, 4Th Floor, Civic Centre, Near Minto Road, ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant New Delhi बिाम Vs. Bombardier Transportation Gmbh, C/Co Asa & Associates, K S House 118, Shahpur Jat, New Delhi 110049 ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aadcb-4031-C

section 234B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). 5. The Ld AO grossly erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) of the act for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.” Factual Matrix: 4. The assessee is a company incorporated in Germany and is a tax resident of Germany. The assessee is engaged

BOMBARDIER TRANSPORTATION GMBH,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

section 234B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the\nAct').\n5. The Ld AO grossly erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) of the act for\nconcealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.”\nFactual Matrix:\n4.\nThe assessee is a company incorporated in Germany and is a tax resident of\nGermany. The assessee is engaged