CORNING SAS- INDIA BRANCH OFFICE,GURGAON vs. DDIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

transfer pricing they must replicate the dynamics of market forces, as there is no concept of free lunch in business dealings. The benefit test which is well recognized by OECO and other developed countries Tax regime have to be seen for allowing the payment in case of Intra-group services. The expected benefit must be sufficiently direct and substantial

CORNING SAS- INDIA BRANCH OFFICE,GURUGRAM vs. DDIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), GURGAON

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

transfer pricing they must replicate the dynamics of market forces, as there is no concept of free lunch in business dealings. The benefit test which is well recognized by OECO and other developed countries Tax regime have to be seen for allowing the payment in case of Intra-group services. The expected benefit must be sufficiently direct and substantial

M/S CORNING SAS INDIA BRANCH OFFICE,GURGAON vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

transfer pricing they must replicate the dynamics of market forces, as there is no concept of free lunch in business dealings. The benefit test which is well recognized by OECO and other developed countries Tax regime have to be seen for allowing the payment in case of Intra-group services. The expected benefit must be sufficiently direct and substantial

BT E-SERV (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, grounds Nos

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Transfer Pricing (‘TP’) documentation; and b. Determining the arm’s length margins / prices using 4 ITA 6690/Del/2016 Assessment year 2012-13 data pertaining only to financial Year (‘FY’) 2011-12 which was not available to the Appellant at the time of complying with the Indian TP documentation requirements. 5. The learned AO / TPO/ DRP have erred by rejecting certain functionally

TELETUBE ELECTRONICS LTD

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed

price of the asset was fixed it was between the parties to decide about the terms of payments which unless prohibited in the statute cannot be gone behind. 15. On an examination of the lease deed, the ITAT held that the leasehold rights in the business assets were sold for Rs.20.729 crore which was undoubtedly agreed to be paid

TELETUBE ELECTRONICS LTD

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed

price of the asset was fixed it was between the parties to decide about the terms of payments which unless prohibited in the statute cannot be gone behind. 15. On an examination of the lease deed, the ITAT held that the leasehold rights in the business assets were sold for Rs.20.729 crore which was undoubtedly agreed to be paid

CIT vs. M/S TELETUBE ELECTRONICS LTD

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed

price of the asset was fixed it was between the parties to decide about the terms of payments which unless prohibited in the statute cannot be gone behind. 15. On an examination of the lease deed, the ITAT held that the leasehold rights in the business assets were sold for Rs.20.729 crore which was undoubtedly agreed to be paid

DENTSPLY INDIA PVT LTD vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 752/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2002-03 Ita No. 1682/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2003-04 Ita No. 4195/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No. 263, Fies, Patparganj Circle-10(1), Industrial Area, Delhi-110092 New Delhi (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd3171E Assessee By : Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Meera Srivastava, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

sections 92 to 92F of Chapter X of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“ITA”) were made effective from 1 April 2001 (i.e. from AY 2002- 03 which is the first AY under consideration). The ITA Nos. 752, 1682 & 4195/Del/2009 5 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd. Assessee and its consultant were not fully aware about the practices regarding determination

DENTSPLY INDIA PVT. LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 752/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2002-03 Ita No. 1682/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2003-04 Ita No. 4195/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No. 263, Fies, Patparganj Circle-10(1), Industrial Area, Delhi-110092 New Delhi (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd3171E Assessee By : Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Meera Srivastava, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

sections 92 to 92F of Chapter X of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“ITA”) were made effective from 1 April 2001 (i.e. from AY 2002- 03 which is the first AY under consideration). The ITA Nos. 752, 1682 & 4195/Del/2009 5 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd. Assessee and its consultant were not fully aware about the practices regarding determination

DENTSPLY INDIA PVT. LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 752/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2002-03 Ita No. 1682/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2003-04 Ita No. 4195/Del/2009 : Asstt. Year: 2004-05 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No. 263, Fies, Patparganj Circle-10(1), Industrial Area, Delhi-110092 New Delhi (Appellantt (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd3171E Assessee By : Sh. Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Meera Srivastava, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

sections 92 to 92F of Chapter X of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“ITA”) were made effective from 1 April 2001 (i.e. from AY 2002- 03 which is the first AY under consideration). The ITA Nos. 752, 1682 & 4195/Del/2009 5 Dentsply India Pvt. Ltd. Assessee and its consultant were not fully aware about the practices regarding determination

TUPPERWARE INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 9, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2013-14

section 195 of the Act. 22.1.6 The Ld. AR also submitted that since the Ld. TPO examined the transaction of reimbursement of expenses in detail during the transfer pricing proceedings taking into account the documentary evidence submitted during the course of assessment proceedings and no adverse inference was drawn by him in his order dated 26.09.2017 in respect

AMADEUS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. Vijay Pal Rao & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-2, New Delhi M/S. Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., E- 9, Connaught House, Connaught Place, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca0364L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Respondent By Sh. H.S. Choudhary, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03.08.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 23.10.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.:

transfer pricing related provision which is in the nature of a SAAR (specific anti-abuse rule), and that every anti-abuse legislation, whether SAAR (specific anti- abuse rule) or GAAR (general anti-abuse rule), is a legislation seeking the taxpayers to organize their affairs in a manner compliant with the norms set out in such anti-abuse legislation. An anti

EVALUESERVE.COM PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

section 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. 12. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act mechanically and without recording any adequate satisfaction for such initiation 43. Brief facts of the case are as under: The assessee company, during

EVALUESERVE.COM PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

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

section 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. 12. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act mechanically and without recording any adequate satisfaction for such initiation 43. Brief facts of the case are as under: The assessee company, during

M/S. LG ELECTRONICS INDIA PVT. LTD.,GAUTAM BUIDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, NOIDA

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

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10] Lg L.G Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The A.C.I.T Vs. No.51, Udyog Vihar, Circle -3 Plot Surajpur Kasna Road Noida Greater Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Pan No. Aaacl 1745Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

269 Advertisement 2 Product Advertisement 152,43,41,881 3 Sponsorship 5,49,61,260 4 Point of Sales Activity 139,54,95,848 5 Monthly scheme 353,11,65,707 6 Distributor discount 6,82,78,903 7 Dealer promotion 21,02,84,392 8 LG Shoppe margin 1,46,10,627 Sl Particulars Amount

GKN DRIVELINE(INDIA) LTD.,,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2008-09

section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) on 24.09.2012 in relation to the assessment year 2008-09. 2. Ground no. 2 of the appeal is against the corporate addition of Rs.18,09,04,254/- made by the AO towards payment for Management Consultancy and Business Auxiliary Services. 3. Succinctly, the facts of the case

DDIT, DEHRADUN vs. BG EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishidy. Director Of Income Tax, Bg Exploration & Production India International Taxation, Ltd, Dehradun Bg House, Vs. Lake Boulevard Road, Hiranandani Business Park, Powai, Mumbai Pan: Aaace4569K (Appellant) (Respondent)

transferred or services provided and the quantum and the value of each such transaction or class of such transaction: (/) a description of the methods considered for determining the arm's length price in relation to each international transaction or class of transaction, the method selected as the most appropriate method along with explanations as to why such method

DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), NEW DELHI vs. ADOBE SYSTEMS SOFTWARE IRELAND LTD., DUBLIN, IRELAND

In the result, appeals by the assessee stand allowed in terms of the above order and the Revenue’s appeal stand dismissed as above

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

transfer pricing analysis has been undertaken in respect of a instant case), nothing further would be left to be attributed to the alleged PE of Adobe Ireland and that, accordingly, would automatically extinguish the need for attribution of any additional profits to the alleged PE. • Without prejudice to the above, of any additional profits are required to be attributed