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

M/S. AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES (INTERNATIONAL) PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, GURGAON

In the result ground No. 3 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishiagilent Technologies Acit, (International) Pvt. Ltd, Circle-1, Vs. Plot No.-Cp-11, Sector-8, Gurgaon Imt Mangsar, Gurgaon Pan: Aadca4115C (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 271 (1) © of the income tax act and ground No. 5 is with respect to the charging of the interest and ground No. 6 is regarding various judicial pronouncement. Penalty and interest are consequential. In view of the above facts, we dismiss those grounds as stated above. Therefore only grounds to be adjudicated remain are ground

MORNINGSTAR INDIA PVT. LTD.,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT, DELHI

The appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishimorningstar India Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 9Th Floor, Platinum Tech Circle-17(1), Park, Delhi Plot No. 17/18, Sector-30A, Vashi, Navi Mumbai Pan: Aaacx0362K (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 144C has preferred this appeal before us. 4. The learned authorised representative submitted that assessee challenges the transfer pricing adjustment made to the international transaction of the assessee of INR 147770775/– and is pressing for exclusion of following comparables: a. Accentia technologies Ltd b. E Clerx services Ltd c. Infosys BPO Ltd d. TCs E serve international

DCIT, CC-29, NEW DELHI vs. DHARAMPAL SATYALPAL LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 1977/Del/2020 (A.Y 2014-15)

transfer pricing adjustment is not sustainable under law. 76. Learned departmental representative vehemently supported order of learned transfer pricing officer and learned CIT - A. 77. We have carefully considered rival contention and perused orders of lower authorities. Facts in facts show in present case is that assessee has given a loan to its wholly owned subsidiary in Switzerland namely

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

Section 144C of the Act refers to the Dispute Resolution Panel. Sub-section (1) of section 144C provides that in case of an eligible assessee, the Assessing Officer shall notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Act forward a draft of the proposed order of assessment to the assessee if he proposes to make on or after

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

Section 144C of the Act refers to the Dispute Resolution Panel. Sub-section (1) of section 144C provides that in case of an eligible assessee, the Assessing Officer shall notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Act forward a draft of the proposed order of assessment to the assessee if he proposes to make on or after

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

Section 144C of the Act refers to the Dispute Resolution Panel. Sub-section (1) of section 144C provides that in case of an eligible assessee, the Assessing Officer shall notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Act forward a draft of the proposed order of assessment to the assessee if he proposes to make on or after

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

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

transfer pricing legislation and relied upon the decision of LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.5140/Del/2011). 15. Ld. DRP while agreeing with the TPO that the payment for intra group services to AEs is separate international transactions independent of financial results and capable of verifiable separately on the following issues :- “In an uncontrolled environment any taxpayer for availing the services

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

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

transfer pricing legislation and relied upon the decision of LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.5140/Del/2011). 15. Ld. DRP while agreeing with the TPO that the payment for intra group services to AEs is separate international transactions independent of financial results and capable of verifiable separately on the following issues :- “In an uncontrolled environment any taxpayer for availing the services

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

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

transfer pricing legislation and relied upon the decision of LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.5140/Del/2011). 15. Ld. DRP while agreeing with the TPO that the payment for intra group services to AEs is separate international transactions independent of financial results and capable of verifiable separately on the following issues :- “In an uncontrolled environment any taxpayer for availing the services

BLACKROCK SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GURGAON

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiblack Rock Services India Private Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5Th Floor, Hsidc Building Vanijya Limited, 3Rd Floor, Rolta Corporate Towers, 187, Nikunj, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Phase-I, Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan: Aabch4449Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Black Rock Services India Private The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Limited, Income Tax , 3Rd Floor, Rolta Corporate Towers, 187, Circle-1(1), Phase-I, Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan: Aabch4449Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 144C of the act dated 24/2/2015 where the assessed income was determined at INR 18936258/– against the returned income of INR 4652993/– wherein the adjustment on account of the arm‟s-length price of INR 14283265/– was made. Assessee aggrieved with the order has preferred this appeal before us. The 1st ground of appeal is general in nature

BLACKROCK SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, GURGAON

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiblack Rock Services India Private Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5Th Floor, Hsidc Building Vanijya Limited, 3Rd Floor, Rolta Corporate Towers, 187, Nikunj, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Phase-I, Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan: Aabch4449Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Black Rock Services India Private The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Limited, Income Tax , 3Rd Floor, Rolta Corporate Towers, 187, Circle-1(1), Phase-I, Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan: Aabch4449Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 144C of the act dated 24/2/2015 where the assessed income was determined at INR 18936258/– against the returned income of INR 4652993/– wherein the adjustment on account of the arm‟s-length price of INR 14283265/– was made. Assessee aggrieved with the order has preferred this appeal before us. The 1st ground of appeal is general in nature

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

price fixed by Regional director of Central Govt., while approving the terms of the related agreement in accordance with the provisions of section 297 of the Companies Act, 1956. (iii) That adjustment of royalty and consequential claim of deduction u/s 80IB/80IC is illegal, arbitrary and based on conjectures and surmises. 14(i). That on facts and circumstances of the case

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SWAROSKI INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2004-05

297/-. Only this international transaction is under dispute. The assessee applied Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method to demonstrate that the international transaction was at ALP. In order to fortify the adoption of CUP as the most appropriate method, the assessee argued that the imports were made as per the price list provided by its AE which was available

M/S. SWARO vs. KI INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHIVS.ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2004-05

297/-. Only this international transaction is under dispute. The assessee applied Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method to demonstrate that the international transaction was at ALP. In order to fortify the adoption of CUP as the most appropriate method, the assessee argued that the imports were made as per the price list provided by its AE which was available

DCIT, CC-29, NEW DELHI vs. DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 1976/Del/2020 (A.Y 2013-14)

price, which are, further transferred to eligible units at actual cost comprising of procurement cost, processing cost, freight expenses on FIFO [ 1st in 1st out] basis. Therefore, it was stated that assessee has transferred goods at total cost comprising all these cost components. Merely because silver for is also sold by appellant to third-party customers at a price higher

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)

Section 144C(5) . The DRP procedure can only be initiated by an assessee objecting to the draft assessment order. This would enable correction in the proposed order (draft assessment order) before a final assessment order is passed. Therefore, we are of the view that in the present facts this issue could be agitated before and rectified

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

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

transfer", hence it was expected to record same at arm's length price. He has pleaded that assessee is blowing hot and cold in same breath. When it comes to transfer of services and goods, it opposes arm's length price adjustment and says that expenses which have been incurred in past need Dharampal Satyapal Ltd Vs, DCIT

ACIT, FARIDABAD vs. M/S VA TECH ESHER WYSS FLOVEL LTD, FARIDABAD

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

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2005-06 Vs. M/S. Va Tech Esher Wyas Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle I, Block –I-B, Cgo Flovel Ltd., 49/5, Mathura Road, Complex, Nh-4, Faridabad Village Prithla, Faridabad Pan : Aaacf0010A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Ashwani Taneja, Adv. Department By Sh. H.K. Choudhary, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 23.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 13.11.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.:

Section 37 of the Act is not applicable. 13. The assessee has claimed the expenses on the basis of accrual on the provisions of the accounting standard and the accounts of the company are duly audited and no defect in the same has been pointed out. 14. Assessee produced sufficient evidence and material before the authorities below to establish