VODAFONE IDEA LTD. (EARLIER KNWON AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.),MUMBAI vs. ACIT,. CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, all above said grounds are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shriyogesh Kumar U.S.Vodafone Idea Ltd Vs. Acit, (Earlier Known As Vodafone Circle-26(2), Mobile Services Ltd) New Delhi 10Th Floor, Birla Centurion, Century Mills Compound, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai, Maharastra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacb2100P

transfer pricing provisions relating to avoidance of tax introduced by the Finance Act, 2001 w.e.f. 01-04-2002. The impugned assessment year before us is the first full fledged year of business thereafter. Section 92(1) mandates any income arising from an international transaction to be computed having regard to arms length price. The same admittedly applies in case

LM WIND POWER AS ,DENMARK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 2(2)(1), DELHI

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Lm Wind Power As, Vs, Acit, Circle Juptervej 6, 6000 Kolding, International Tax 2(2)(1), Denmark – 999999. Delhi (Pan :Aabcl8590Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate Shri Arpitgoyal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2025 Date Of Order : 21.11.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appealpreferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2025 Passed By The Acit, Circle Int. Tax 2(2)(1), Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2020-21 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessment Order Dated 29.07.2024 Passed Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (He Act") For Assessment Year 2020-21 Assessing The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.81,14, 14,893 Is Bad In Law, Void- Ab-Initio & Therefore, Liable To Be Quashed And/ Or Set Aside.

2% of the value of each international transaction may be levied for failure to report international transaction in Form No.3CEB.In this regard, reference is made to section 92E which provides that parties, who have entered into an international transaction during the previous year, shall obtain a report from an accountant and furnish such report on or before the specified date

GARG ACRYLICS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

2(24) read with section 36(1)(va) and not by section 43 B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the act”) 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.14,400/- made by AO on account of disallowance of expenditure incurred on Club Fees of Directors

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI vs. GARG ACRYLICS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

2(24) read with section 36(1)(va) and not by section 43 B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the act”) 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.14,400/- made by AO on account of disallowance of expenditure incurred on Club Fees of Directors

AT KEARNEY LTD.- INDIA BRANCH OFFICE,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

2) and 92D(3) of the Act. 4.4 Thereafter, the Appellant claimed to have filed an accountant's report in Form 3CEB (in accordance with section 92E of the Act) along with the return of income, inter-alla reporting the particulars of its international transactions with AES, along with method(s) used to determine the arm's length price

DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI vs. A.T. KEARNEY LTD., GURGAON

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

2) and 92D(3) of the Act. 4.4 Thereafter, the Appellant claimed to have filed an accountant's report in Form 3CEB (in accordance with section 92E of the Act) along with the return of income, inter-alla reporting the particulars of its international transactions with AES, along with method(s) used to determine the arm's length price

DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI vs. A.T. KEARNEY LTD., GURGAON

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

2) and 92D(3) of the Act. 4.4 Thereafter, the Appellant claimed to have filed an accountant's report in Form 3CEB (in accordance with section 92E of the Act) along with the return of income, inter-alla reporting the particulars of its international transactions with AES, along with method(s) used to determine the arm's length price

AT KEARNEY LTD.- INDIA BRANCH OFFICE,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

2) and 92D(3) of the Act. 4.4 Thereafter, the Appellant claimed to have filed an accountant's report in Form 3CEB (in accordance with section 92E of the Act) along with the return of income, inter-alla reporting the particulars of its international transactions with AES, along with method(s) used to determine the arm's length price

PCL FOODS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDI CIT, NATIONAL E- ASSESMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17] Pcl Foods Private Limited, Additional / Joint/ Unit No.-219, Plot No. 2, Deputy/Assistant Vardhman Crown Mall, Lsc, Vs Commissioner Of Income Sector 19, Dwarka, New Tax/ Income Tax Officer, Delhi-110075. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi. Pan- Aahcp3493L Assessee Revenue

Transfer pricing Officer (TPO) under Section 92CA(1) of the Act, by the ITO, ward 19(2), New Delhi to determine the Arm’s length price in respect of international transactions undertaken by the assessee company with its Associates Enterprises. The TPO noted that the assessee had entered into international transactions with the following group entities Sr. Name

JUBILANT FOODWORKS LTD.,NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, NOIDA

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2014-15 Jubilant Foodworks Ltd., Versus Dcit, Circle-1, Plot No. 1A, Sector-16A, Noida. Noida. Pan: Aabcd1821C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate Sh. K.M. Gupta, Advocate Sh. Shruti Khimta, A.R. Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Cit-Dr

transfer pricing provisions are not attracted, as the disputed transactions are with parties who do not qualify as Associated Enterprises (AEs) in terms of section 92A of the Act. However, both the TPO and learned DRP rejected the aforesaid contention of the assessee. In terms with the directions of learned DRP, assessment order was finalized. 9. Before us, learned

TATA NYK SHIPPING PTE. LTD. ,SINGAPORE vs. CIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-3, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Tata Nyk Shipping Pte. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., International Taxation-3, 6, Shenton Way, #18-08B, New Delhi Oue Downtown 2, Singapore Pan :Aadct9945P (Appellant) (Respondent)

transfer pricing adjustments. In view of the order passed by the 14 AY: 2016-17 TPO, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act accepting the income returned by the Assessee. He submitted, since, the mandate of the Assessing Officer was to examine the limited scrutiny issues and he could not have travelled

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

92A, 92B, 92C, 92D & 92E. A reasonable guidance however, may be drawn from this definition for other sections in the Act in respect of a fixed place PE. The above definition suggests that a fixed place of business is required for a permanent establishment to exist. The AO in his order does not indicate as to how a fixed place

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

92A, 92B, 92C, 92D & 92E. A reasonable guidance however, may be drawn from this definition for other sections in the Act in respect of a fixed place PE. The above definition suggests that a fixed place of business is required for a permanent establishment to exist. The AO in his order does not indicate as to how a fixed place

JUBILANT FOODWORKS LTD,NOIDA vs. ACIT,CIRCLE,5(1)(1)., GAUTAM BUDDHA NAGER

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

2) issued on 22.09.2019. Since the\nassessee was entered into international transactions with related parties therefore,\nthe case of the assessee was referred to Transfer Pricing Officer (\"TPO\") for\ndetermination of Arm's Length Price [“ALP\"] of such transactions. The TPO vide\norder dated 31.07.2021 u/s 92CA(3) of the Act proposed certain adjustments. The\nAO passed draft assessment order

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. LUMAX INDUSTRIES LIMITED

92A (2) of the Act, Stanley became an AE of the Assessee. 5. During AYs 2004-05 and 2005-06 the Assessee entered into the following the international transactions: International transactions 2004-05 2005-06 Import of raw material 6,44,50,527 9,14,53,820 Import of capital equipment 62,50,907 7,86,59,617 Payment

BALLUPUR SOLAR POWER PROJECTS PRIVATE LTD. ,DELHI vs. AO CIRCLE-4(2), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Section 92A of the Act. 3. Without Prejudice to ground 2, even if EREN France constitutes AE of Appellant, erred in not considering the detailed economic analysis submitted as additional evidence before the DRP to benchmark the impugned transaction which substantiates that the purchase of solar modules/panels (i.e., capital assets) were at arm’s length from an Indian transfer pricing

JE ENERGY VENTURES P.LTD,NOIDA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1)(1), G B NAGAR

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2018-19 Je Energy Ventures P. Ltd., Vs Acit, Plot No.1A, Sector-16A, Circle 5(1)(1), Industrial Area, Gb Nagar. Noida (Uttar Pradesh) – 201 301. Pan : Aaace0653L

2 addition relying its finding in assessee’s case for AY 2013-14 wherein corporate guarantee was considered to be an international transaction. 3. The ld. counsel has submitted that the invocation of corporate guarantee is a transaction between the assessee and an unrelated entity which is EXIM Bank, therefore, provisions of section 92A cannot be invoked and there

ITO,, NEW DELHI vs. M/S AMB HOMES PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareekito, Ward 1 (1), Vs. M/S. Amb Homes Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. D-62, Ground Floor, Defence Colony, New Delhi – 110 024. (Pan : Aagca4596C) Co No.152/Del/2017 (In Ita No.2749/Del/2017) (Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Amb Homes Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 1 (1), D-62, Ground Floor, New Delhi. Defence Colony, New Delhi – 110 024. (Pan : Aagca4596C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mohit Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.09.2024 Date Of Order : 06.12.2024 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-I, New Delhi [Hereinafter

transfer to the assessee. He submitted that no explanation and evidence to show 10 CO No.152/Del/2017 the creditworthiness of these entities was given. He further submitted that ITAT, Mumbai in ITA No.1835 & 1836/Mum/2014 M/s Royal Rich Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT Dated 24.08.2016 has held that it is for the assessee to explain the creditworthiness of the share subscribers