VAIDYA MANGAT RAI FOUNDATION,CHANDIGARH vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharmavaidya Mangat Rai The Commissioner Of Foundation Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Friends Colony Chandigarh Gali No.2, Hansi Road Bhiwani. Pan-Aadtv 6078Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Adv. Department By Ms. Sapna Bhattia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 25/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18/04/2024

iv) of the first proviso, rejecting such application, after affording it a reasonable opportunity of being heard;] (iii) …….” 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Jaipur in the case of the Assessee held that the Activities of the Assessee had commenced in July 2020, hence the assessee was liable to make application for Approval u/s 80G

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

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 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

AMWAY INDIA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), DELHI / NFAC, DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhir Pareek & Shri Manish Agarwalamway India Enterprises Private Dcit, Limited, Circle-1(1), Ground Floor, Elegance Tower, Vs. Delhi/Nfac. Plot No.8, Non Hierarchical Commercial, Jasola, Delhi-110025. Pan-Aaaca5603Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

5. Ground of appeal No.1 is general in nature and needs no adjudication. 6. In Ground of appeal No. 2 assessee has challenged the various additions/disallowance made on account of transfer price adjustment and donation and further challenged the income computed in the order passed u/s 143(1) of the Amway India Enterprises Private Limited vs. DCIT Act where

DCM SHRIIRAM LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, NEW DELHI

80G of\nthe Act. The company has declared book profit u/s 115JB at INR\n2,46,12,21,172/- and paid MAT on book profits. The return of\nincome was revised on 13.07.2016 at an income of INR\n22,56,33,190/-. The case of the assessee was taken up for scrutiny\nand a reference under section 92CA

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. DCM SHRIRAM LTD, NEW DELHI

80G of\nthe Act. The company has declared book profit u/s 115JB at INR\n2,46,12,21,172/- and paid MAT on book profits. The return of\nincome was revised on 13.07.2016 at an income of INR\n22,56,33,190/-. The case of the assessee was taken up for scrutiny\nand a reference under section 92CA

DCM SHRIRAM LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI

80G of\nthe Act. The company has declared book profit u/s 115JB at INR\n2,46,12,21,172/- and paid MAT on book profits. The return of\nincome was revised on 13.07.2016 at an income of INR\n22,56,33,190/-. The case of the assessee was taken up for scrutiny\nand a reference under section 92CA

DCM SHRIRAM LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

80G of\nthe Act. The company has declared book profit u/s 115JB at INR\n2,46,12,21,172/- and paid MAT on book profits. The return of\nincome was revised on 13.07.2016 at an income of INR\n22,56,33,190/-. The case of the assessee was taken up for scrutiny\nand a reference under section 92CA

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)

80G while making such donations. Re: Disallowance U/S 80JJAA - INR 15. That the AO/DRP erred on facts and in law in disallowing deduction claimed u/s 80JJAA of the Act to the extent of INR 30,00,253/-. 8 ITA No.1523/Del./2022 15.1 That the AO/DRP erred on facts and in law by applying the provision of amended section

SONY INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. NATIOANAL E- ASSESMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri N.K. Billaiya

price below cost is allowed even though such loss has not been realized actually. At this stage, we need to emphasize once again that the above system of commercial accounting can be superseded or modified by legislative enactment. This is where section comes into play. Under that section, the Central Government is empowered to notify from time to time

GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

iv) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB to the extent of\nthe limits specified in sub-section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act\nviz. 70% of export profits, under misconception of law, without\nappreciating that such limits are not applicable for computing book\nprofits under that section. Accordingly, book profits of\nRs.34,37,36,599 were returned under section

M/S GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT,, NEW DELHI

iv) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB to the extent of the limits specified in sub-section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act viz. 70% of export profits, under misconception of law, without appreciating that such limits are not applicable for computing book profits under that section. Accordingly, book profits of Rs.34,37,36,599 were returned under section

GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

iv) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB to the extent of the limits specified in sub-section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act viz. 70% of export profits, under misconception of law, without appreciating that such limits are not applicable for computing book profits under that section. Accordingly, book profits of Rs.34,37,36,599 were returned under section

GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

iv) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB to the extent of\nthe limits specified in sub-section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act\nviz. 70% of export profits, under misconception of law, without\nappreciating that such limits are not applicable for computing book\nprofits under that section. Accordingly, book profits of\nRs.34,37,36,599 were returned under section

GUJRAT GUARDIAN LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

iv) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB to the extent of\nthe limits specified in sub-section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act\nviz. 70% of export profits, under misconception of law, without\nappreciating that such limits are not applicable for computing book\nprofits under that section. Accordingly, book profits of\nRs.34,37,36,599 were returned under section

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GUJRAT GUARDIAN LTD., NEW DELHI

iv) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB to the extent of\nthe limits specified in sub-section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act\nviz. 70% of export profits, under misconception of law, without\nappreciating that such limits are not applicable for computing book\nprofits under that section. Accordingly, book profits of\nRs.34,37,36,599 were returned under section

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S GUJRAT GUARDIAN LTD.,, NEW DELHI

iv) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB to the extent of\nthe limits specified in sub-section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act\nviz. 70% of export profits, under misconception of law, without\nappreciating that such limits are not applicable for computing book\nprofits under that section. Accordingly, book profits of\nRs.34,37,36,599 were returned under section

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD., NEW DELHI

iv) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB to the extent of\nthe limits specified in sub-section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act\nviz. 70% of export profits, under misconception of law, without\nappreciating that such limits are not applicable for computing book\nprofits under that section. Accordingly, book profits of\nRs.34,37,36,599 were returned under section