M/S DABUR INDIA LTD.,,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava, Jm Ita No. 3257/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Dabur India Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 8/3, Asaf Ali Road, Tax, Central Circle-22, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd0474C

section 801B & 801C of the Act, 1961? 7. The appellant craves leave, to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of the hearing.” 5. Ground Nos. 1 to 7 of the assessee’s appeal which are co-related and Ground Nos. 1 & 2 of the departmental appeal relate to the chargeability of the royalty

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

801C as per Audit Reports in Form No. 10CCB filed along with the details of profit and loss accounts in respect of units eligible for deductions u/s 80IB and 80IC of the I.T. Act, 1961. The adjusted book profit of Rs. 280 57,67,940/- and tax payable thereon Rs. 31,48,07,162/- has been computed u/s 115JB

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

801C as per Audit Reports in Form No. 10CCB filed along with the details of profit and loss accounts in respect of units eligible for deductions u/s 80IB and 80IC of the I.T. Act, 1961. The adjusted book profit of Rs. 280 57,67,940/- and tax payable thereon Rs. 31,48,07,162/- has been computed u/s 115JB

M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

801C as per Audit Reports in Form No. 10CCB filed along with the details of profit and loss accounts in respect of units eligible for deductions u/s 80IB and 80IC of the I.T. Act, 1961. The adjusted book profit of Rs. 280 57,67,940/- and tax payable thereon Rs. 31,48,07,162/- has been computed u/s 115JB

M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

801C as per Audit Reports in Form No. 10CCB filed along with the details of profit and loss accounts in respect of units eligible for deductions u/s 80IB and 80IC of the I.T. Act, 1961. The adjusted book profit of Rs. 280 57,67,940/- and tax payable thereon Rs. 31,48,07,162/- has been computed u/s 115JB

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

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

section 153 A of The Act. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd Vs, DCIT ITA No. 3738, 3739/Del/2016 (A) & ITA No. 3882 & 3883/Del/2016(R) Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12 13(i). That Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in sustaining disallowance of purchase of sandalwood oil to extent of Rs 54,94,24,290/- holding same to be bogus

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

price revisions, being an accrued liability at the time of purchase of raw materials, are recorded in the books of accounts by the assessee. At the year end, the company estimates the additional liability on account of price revision under negotiation and makes upward/downward provision, as the case may be, in relation to material supplied until

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, NEW DELHI vs. LOTUS HERBALS P.LTD, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Transfer Pricing Order u/s. No. Entity Year 92CA(3) Paper Book Page 1. LHCC 2014-15 849-850 2. 2015-16 851-852 3. 2017-18 853-854 4. 2018-19 855-857 5. 2014-15 858-859 6. KC 2017-18 860-861 DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. f) Further, allocation of AMP expenses, on a highly

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, DELHI vs. LOTUS HERBALS PVT. LTD, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Transfer Pricing Order u/s. No. Entity Year 92CA(3) Paper Book Page 1. LHCC 2014-15 849-850 2. 2015-16 851-852 3. 2017-18 853-854 4. 2018-19 855-857 5. 2014-15 858-859 6. KC 2017-18 860-861 DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. f) Further, allocation of AMP expenses, on a highly

DCIT, CC-20, DELHI vs. LOTUS HERBALS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Transfer Pricing Order u/s. No. Entity Year 92CA(3) Paper Book Page 1. LHCC 2014-15 849-850 2. 2015-16 851-852 3. 2017-18 853-854 4. 2018-19 855-857 5. 2014-15 858-859 6. KC 2017-18 860-861 DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. f) Further, allocation of AMP expenses, on a highly

DCIT, CC-20, DELHI vs. LOTUS HERBALS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Transfer Pricing Order u/s. No. Entity Year 92CA(3) Paper Book Page 1. LHCC 2014-15 849-850 2. 2015-16 851-852 3. 2017-18 853-854 4. 2018-19 855-857 5. 2014-15 858-859 6. KC 2017-18 860-861 DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. f) Further, allocation of AMP expenses, on a highly

DCIT, CC-20, DELHI vs. LOTUS HERBALS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Transfer Pricing Order u/s. No. Entity Year 92CA(3) Paper Book Page 1. LHCC 2014-15 849-850 2. 2015-16 851-852 3. 2017-18 853-854 4. 2018-19 855-857 5. 2014-15 858-859 6. KC 2017-18 860-861 DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. f) Further, allocation of AMP expenses, on a highly

COSMIC INFORMATICS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Transfer Pricing Order u/s. No. Entity Year 92CA(3) Paper Book Page 1. LHCC 2014-15 849-850 2. 2015-16 851-852 3. 2017-18 853-854 4. 2018-19 855-857 5. 2014-15 858-859 6. KC 2017-18 860-861 DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. f) Further, allocation of AMP expenses, on a highly

COSMIC INFORMATICS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Transfer Pricing Order u/s. No. Entity Year 92CA(3) Paper Book Page 1. LHCC 2014-15 849-850 2. 2015-16 851-852 3. 2017-18 853-854 4. 2018-19 855-857 5. 2014-15 858-859 6. KC 2017-18 860-861 DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. f) Further, allocation of AMP expenses, on a highly

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. LEGACY FOOD PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

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

801C not taking into consideration the fact that as per action point no. 5 mentioned in the rules the report in form 10CCB ought to have been accompanied with copy of agreement with any Central Government/State Governments/Local Authority for carrying an eligible business. 3. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have considered the legal issue raised

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. LEGACY FOOD PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

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

801C not taking into consideration the fact that as per action point no. 5 mentioned in the rules the report in form 10CCB ought to have been accompanied with copy of agreement with any Central Government/State Governments/Local Authority for carrying an eligible business. 3. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have considered the legal issue raised

DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI vs. C & S ELECTRIC LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed as above

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No. 2622/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No. 2623/Del/2018, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No. 7981/Del/2018, A.Y. 2015-16 C & S Electric Limited Deputy Commissioner Of 222, Okhla Industrial Estate Income Tax, Phase-Iii, New Delhi Vs. Circle-1, Ltu, New Delhi Pan: Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 2532/Del/2018, A.Y.2013-14 Ita No. 2533/Del/2018, A.Y.2014-15 Ita No. 8274/Del/2018, A.Y.2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of C & S Electric Limited Income Tax, (Formerly Controls & Circle-1, Ltu, Vs. Switchgear Co. Ltd.) New Delhi 222, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Anil Bhalla, Ca Respondent By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/06/2025 Order Per Bench Cross Appeal By The Assessee & Revenue Containing Common Facts Were Heard Together Being Inter-Connected With Each Other & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order. Ita No.2532, 2533 & 8274/Del/2018 C & S Electric Ltd. 2. These Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Are Directed Against Orders Dated 10.01.18 & 25.09.2018 Respectively Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, New Delhi [‘Cit(A)’].

section 80IC and 10AA of the Act: “4.4 In year under consideration the details filed by the authorized representative show that some goods are transferred at lower rates and some are at higher rate as compared to rates charged to outside parties. The authorized representative has submitted that the net difference (Overcharge) of (74,95,918/-) may be allowed

ACIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI vs. C&S ELECTRIC LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed as above

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No. 2622/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No. 2623/Del/2018, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No. 7981/Del/2018, A.Y. 2015-16 C & S Electric Limited Deputy Commissioner Of 222, Okhla Industrial Estate Income Tax, Phase-Iii, New Delhi Vs. Circle-1, Ltu, New Delhi Pan: Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 2532/Del/2018, A.Y.2013-14 Ita No. 2533/Del/2018, A.Y.2014-15 Ita No. 8274/Del/2018, A.Y.2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of C & S Electric Limited Income Tax, (Formerly Controls & Circle-1, Ltu, Vs. Switchgear Co. Ltd.) New Delhi 222, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Anil Bhalla, Ca Respondent By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/06/2025 Order Per Bench Cross Appeal By The Assessee & Revenue Containing Common Facts Were Heard Together Being Inter-Connected With Each Other & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order. Ita No.2532, 2533 & 8274/Del/2018 C & S Electric Ltd. 2. These Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Are Directed Against Orders Dated 10.01.18 & 25.09.2018 Respectively Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, New Delhi [‘Cit(A)’].

section 80IC and 10AA of the Act: “4.4 In year under consideration the details filed by the authorized representative show that some goods are transferred at lower rates and some are at higher rate as compared to rates charged to outside parties. The authorized representative has submitted that the net difference (Overcharge) of (74,95,918/-) may be allowed

C & S ELECTRIC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI

In the result, the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed as above

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No. 2622/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No. 2623/Del/2018, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No. 7981/Del/2018, A.Y. 2015-16 C & S Electric Limited Deputy Commissioner Of 222, Okhla Industrial Estate Income Tax, Phase-Iii, New Delhi Vs. Circle-1, Ltu, New Delhi Pan: Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 2532/Del/2018, A.Y.2013-14 Ita No. 2533/Del/2018, A.Y.2014-15 Ita No. 8274/Del/2018, A.Y.2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of C & S Electric Limited Income Tax, (Formerly Controls & Circle-1, Ltu, Vs. Switchgear Co. Ltd.) New Delhi 222, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Anil Bhalla, Ca Respondent By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/06/2025 Order Per Bench Cross Appeal By The Assessee & Revenue Containing Common Facts Were Heard Together Being Inter-Connected With Each Other & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order. Ita No.2532, 2533 & 8274/Del/2018 C & S Electric Ltd. 2. These Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Are Directed Against Orders Dated 10.01.18 & 25.09.2018 Respectively Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, New Delhi [‘Cit(A)’].

section 80IC and 10AA of the Act: “4.4 In year under consideration the details filed by the authorized representative show that some goods are transferred at lower rates and some are at higher rate as compared to rates charged to outside parties. The authorized representative has submitted that the net difference (Overcharge) of (74,95,918/-) may be allowed