COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MENTOR GRAPHICS (NOIDA) PVT.LTD

The appeal is allowed

Transfer Pricing Officer. The proviso to sub-section (2) of section 92C makes it clear that where more than one price is determined by employing the most appropriate method, the arm’s length price shall be taken to be the arithmetical mean of such prices. There is no dispute that the prices which are to be considered while computing

MANKIND PHARMA LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), MEERUT

In the result, the additional Ground No

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

9 1 L D P E P o l y B a g 0 0 0 0 1 0 S a t y a m S t a t i o n e ry ( b l a n k ) K G 2 5 . 0 0 3 0 5 0 . 0 0 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2

DCIT, CIRCLE- 16(2), NEW DELHI vs. MENETA AUTOMOTIVE COMPONENTS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

2 having their headquarters mentioned in column 3 shall exercise such powers and perform such function of Transfer Pricing Officers as mentioned in Section 92CA for the purpose of sections 92C and 92D of the Act, in respect of persons or classes of persons mentioned in column 5:” 5. It was submitted by Mr. Mahabir Singh, learned Senior Advocate that

TELETUBE ELECTRONICS LTD

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed

9 of 32 Bhiwadi. No such consent had been taken. The questions raised by the AO remained to be satisfactorily answered and, therefore, it is concluded that these were “collusive and shady transactions”. 11. The CIT (A) also referred to the statements recorded during the course of the assessment proceedings and the survey in great detail and agreed with

TELETUBE ELECTRONICS LTD

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed

9 of 32 Bhiwadi. No such consent had been taken. The questions raised by the AO remained to be satisfactorily answered and, therefore, it is concluded that these were “collusive and shady transactions”. 11. The CIT (A) also referred to the statements recorded during the course of the assessment proceedings and the survey in great detail and agreed with

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. KCT PAPERS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaacit, Circle 5 (1) Vs. M/S. Kct Papers Limited, New Delhi. Thapar House, 124, Janpath, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Aacck4937D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate Shri Deepesh Jain, Advocate Shri Tavish Verma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2025 Date Of Order : 05.12.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Viii, New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 21.03.2014For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, The Assessee Company Belongs To The Thapar Group Established By Late Lala Karam Chand Thapar. There Was A Family Settlement Between The Various Constituents Of The Karam Chand Thapar Family As A Result Of Which Revenue-Organization/Restructuring Of The Group Dated 27Th April, 2001. The Re April, 2001. The Re-Organization Of The Group Companies & Trusts Organization Of The Group Companies & Trusts Was Made Into Four Groups, As Under, Each Headed By The Sons Of Late Lala Was Made Into Four Groups, As Under, Each Headed By The Sons Of Late Lala Was Made Into Four Groups, As Under, Each Headed By The Sons Of Late Lala K.C. Thapar. The Family Tree Of Karam Chand T K.C. Thapar. The Family Tree Of Karam Chand Thapar Family Is Explained As Hapar Family Is Explained As Under In The Form Of A Diagrammatic Chart: Under In The Form Of A Diagrammatic Chart:

9. As regards the specific issue raised by the Hon’ble Bench to demonstrate compliance of condition stipulated in clause (v) of section 2(19AA) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), the relevant provisions are set out hereunder for ready reference: "demerger", in relation to companies, means the transfer, pursuant to a scheme of arrangement under sections

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are allowed in the above terms, but with no orders as to costs

2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO invoked the provisions of Section 92CA (1) of the Act and referred the case to the transfer pricing officer (‘TPO’) for determination of ALP in relation to the international transactions undertaken by MSIL with its AE, SMC. This included purchase of components, consumables

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are allowed in the above terms, but with no orders as to costs

2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO invoked the provisions of Section 92CA (1) of the Act and referred the case to the transfer pricing officer (‘TPO’) for determination of ALP in relation to the international transactions undertaken by MSIL with its AE, SMC. This included purchase of components, consumables

AMAZON WEB SERVICES, INC.,USA vs. ACIT CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 1(1)(1), NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground No. 3 along with its sub-grounds 3.1 to 3.4, ground No. 4 and ground No. 5 along with its sub-ground 5.1 r.w ground No. 2 are allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 90(2) of the Act. Accordingly, we have examined and considered the taxability of the impugned receipts in the hands of the assessee under the provisions of India-USA DTAA. 7. At the outset, the Ld. AR explained the nature of services and the manner in which the cloud computing services are provided by the assessee globally

AMAZON WEB SERVICES, INC.,USA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground No. 3 along with its sub-grounds 3.1 to 3.4, ground No. 4 and ground No. 5 along with its sub-ground 5.1 r.w ground No. 2 are allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 90(2) of the Act. Accordingly, we have examined and considered the taxability of the impugned receipts in the hands of the assessee under the provisions of India-USA DTAA. 7. At the outset, the Ld. AR explained the nature of services and the manner in which the cloud computing services are provided by the assessee globally

HERO FINCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 11(1), DELHI, C.R. BUILDING

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

9,75,00,000/-\nITA No. 2542/Del/2024\n1. That the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi ('the NFAC') erred on facts and\nin law in dismissing the ground challenging disallowance of provision for\ncollection charges amounting to Rs.9.75,00,000 as not adjudicated', thereby\nabdicating the statutory mandate of section 251(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (\"the\nAct

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX

2 K.B. 459. that if property passed when the documents are transferred that property is subject to the condition that the goods should re-vest in the seller if on an examination by the buyer he finds them not to be in accordance with the contract. It is not necessary to consider this aspect because in any case the ascertainment

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)

price of goods transferred inter-unit. Accordingly, learned assessing officer is directed to consider transaction value of goods, which are not processed and sent to eligible unit, is recorded in books of accounts. With respect to goods, which are processed through job work and transferred to eligible unit, learned AO is directed to impute 2% profit over job work charges

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

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

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2011-12 Takata India Pvt Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle 25(1), (Now Joyson Anand Abhishek New Delhi Safety Systems Pvt Ltd.,) Plot No.20, Sector-5, Imt Manesar, Gurugram (Haryana)-122050 Pan/Gir No. Aacct 7200 N (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

2. That the ld Ld. AO/Transfer Pricing Officer (Transfer Pricing Officer) /Ld.DRP have erred in law in rejecting the transfer pricing methodology adopted by the appellant and adopting a different mthod for computing arm’s length price of international transactions entered into by the appellant. 3. That the ld Ld. AO/Transfer Pricing Officer (Transfer Pricing Officer) /Ld.DRP have erred

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

MICROSOFT CORPORATION (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usmicrosoft Corporation (India) Vs. Dcit, Pvt. Ltd, Circle-16(1), 807, New Delhi House, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacm5586C Assessee By : Shri Nageswar Rao & Parth, Adv Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 22/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/02/2024

Pricing - ED071553767IN 12.04.2022 2(2)(2), Delhi 4. Further, it is informed that the above said direction was not sent through e mail. SAURABH SHARMA DCIT(DRP-2), Delhi (Sec)” 8. Based on this it was argued by the ld AR that when the ld DRP‟s directions got uploaded in ITBA portal way back on 07.04.2022 itself

SABRE DECISION TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL LLC,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE 3(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

transfer of any 'tangible product'. Accordingly, consideration received by SDT from its Indian customers cannot be said to be for use of a design or model Process It is submitted that no process has been used by customers of the appellant in India. The automated process taking place in SDT's servers can at most be said to be used

ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE 3(1)(2), NEW DELHI vs. SABRE DECISION TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL LLC, USA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

transfer of any 'tangible product'. Accordingly, consideration received by SDT from its Indian customers cannot be said to be for use of a design or model Process It is submitted that no process has been used by customers of the appellant in India. The automated process taking place in SDT's servers can at most be said to be used