B.R. ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

undisclosed income of the Assessee. This has not been shown insofar as the present case is concerned and that has been noted by the Tribunal also.” [Emphasis Supplied] 1.15 Infact, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v Real Time Marketing (P) Ltd reported in 306 ITR 35 has held as under: “8. There is a finding

B.R. ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

undisclosed income of the Assessee. This has not been shown insofar as the present case is concerned and that has been noted by the Tribunal also.” [Emphasis Supplied] 1.15 Infact, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v Real Time Marketing (P) Ltd reported in 306 ITR 35 has held as under: “8. There is a finding

B.R. ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

undisclosed income of the Assessee. This has not been shown insofar as the present case is concerned and that has been noted by the Tribunal also.” [Emphasis Supplied] 1.15 Infact, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v Real Time Marketing (P) Ltd reported in 306 ITR 35 has held as under: “8. There is a finding

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI vs. PSK FINANCE SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

undisclosed income of the appellant company but the same represented undisclosed income belonging to Mr. Jai Shiv Saxena. 61 PSK Finance Solutions Pvt. Ltd. 8.5 A consequential survey operation u/s 133A of the Income Tax Act was conducted on the business premises of Shri Jai Shiv Saxena on 10.09.2015 at Office No. 135, B Brigade Garden, Church Street, Bangalore. During

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, NEW DELHI vs. MODTECH INDUSTRIES, NEW DELHI

In the result, since the assessment order is set aside on legal issue, therefore, there is no need to decide the additions on merits which are left with academic discussion only

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Prashant Maharishi

transfer agreements dated 11/06/2014 are not incriminating in nature, as the said agreements are duly disclosed and its effects duly reflected in the return of income filed prior to recording of satisfaction note or even the date of search. Similarly, it is submitted that Page nos. 53 and 54 of Annexure A-2 (locker at ICICI) being copy

MODTECH INDUSTRIES,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NEW DELHI

In the result, since the assessment order is set aside on legal issue, therefore, there is no need to decide the additions on merits which are left with academic discussion only

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Prashant Maharishi

transfer agreements dated 11/06/2014 are not incriminating in nature, as the said agreements are duly disclosed and its effects duly reflected in the return of income filed prior to recording of satisfaction note or even the date of search. Similarly, it is submitted that Page nos. 53 and 54 of Annexure A-2 (locker at ICICI) being copy

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

Income Tax Rules, 1962 nor had given any benefit of geographical ITA Nos. 3257 & 3492/Del/2013 68 Dabur India Ltd. condition and size of the market as well as the risk assumed by M/s Dabur International Ltd. 31. As regards to the case of M/s Dabur Nepal Pvt. Ltd., the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Revenue department

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

Income Tax Rules, 1962 nor had given any benefit of geographical ITA Nos. 3257 & 3492/Del/2013 68 Dabur India Ltd. condition and size of the market as well as the risk assumed by M/s Dabur International Ltd. 31. As regards to the case of M/s Dabur Nepal Pvt. Ltd., the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Revenue department

ANALJIT SINGH,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 16(2), DELHI

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

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

transfer price for the impugned transaction of sale of shares. In this regard, without going into the merits / contents of the aforesaid write up and relevance thereof with the impugned transaction of sale of shares and computation of fair market value thereof, it is submitted that aforesaid document does not constitute “evidence” that can be relied upon by the Revenue

FUJITSU CONSULTING INDIA P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-9(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2014-15 Fujitsu Consulting India P. Ltd., Acit, N-63, Lajpat Nagar-Iv, Circle-9(2), Vs New Delhi- 110024 New Delhi. (Pan: Aaach8894G) Appellant Respondent Assessee By: S/Shri Nageswar Rao, Purushottam Anand, Advocates Department By: Shri Sanjay I. Bara, C.I.T. Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.05.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.08.2019 O R D E R

Transfer Pricing (TP) documentation. It was also the assessee’s claim that the safe harbour margin prescribed under Rule 10TD of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (hereinafter called ‘the Rules’) for software development companies was 20% on cost and, therefore, the margin earned by the assessee was more than the margin prescribed under the safe harbour rules and, thus, there

ADDL. CIT, GHAZIABAD vs. M/S. PROGRESSIVE TOOLS & COMPONENTS PVT. LTD., GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2005-06 Addl. Cit, Vs. Progressive Tools & Range-2, Components Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad. 8/3A, Site-Iv, Indl. Area, Sahibabad, Ghaziabad. Pan : Aachp2255L (Appellant) (Respondent)

transfer pricing analysis and income shown by the assessee from an international transaction is required to be computed having regard to its ALP as determined by one the methods enshrined u/s 92C(1). This exercise cannot be dispensed with simply on the ground that there are no unrecorded transactions or undisclosed

GURINDER MOHAN SINGH NINDRAJOG vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

transfer of Rs. 5,85,000 to Forbesganj branch was noted by the Income-tax Officer and also the fact that it did not reach ITA No.322/2005 Page 24 of 38 Forbesganj on the same day. So it was argued that in the appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction to deal with the question of the taxability

GURINDER MOHAN SINGH NINDRAJOG vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

transfer of Rs. 5,85,000 to Forbesganj branch was noted by the Income-tax Officer and also the fact that it did not reach 2011:DHC:5139-DB ITA No.322/2005 Page 24 of 38 Forbesganj on the same day. So it was argued that in the appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction to deal with the question

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

transfer of steam has taken though additional grounds\n\nPage | 42\n\nof appeal be admitted and additional evidences filed in support of\nthe additional claim may deserves to be admitted in the interest of\njustice.\n\n44. On the other hand, Ld. CIT DR seriously objected the\nadmission of additional grounds as well as admission of additional\nevidences

DCM SHRIRAM LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

transfer of steam has taken though additional grounds\nITA Nos.927 & 2587/Del/2022,\n704/Del/2021, 4328 & 1495/Del/2024\nPage | 42 \nof appeal be admitted and additional evidences filed in support of\nthe additional claim may deserves to be admitted in the interest of\njustice.\n44. On the other hand, Ld. CIT DR seriously objected the\nadmission of additional grounds as well as admission

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

transfer of steam has taken though additional grounds\nITA Nos.927 & 2587/Del/2022,\n704/Del/2021, 4328 & 1495/Del/2024\nPage | 42\nof appeal be admitted and additional evidences filed in support of\nthe additional claim may deserves to be admitted in the interest of\njustice.\n44. On the other hand, Ld. CIT DR seriously objected the\nadmission of additional grounds as well as admission

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

Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963: Production of\nadditional evidence before the Tribunal\n\n\"29. The parties to the appeal shall not be entitled to produce\nadditional evidence either oral or documentary before the Tribunal,\nbut if the Tribunal requires any document to be produced or any\nwitness to be examined or any affidavit to be filed to enable

PRAKASH INDUSTRIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CC- 30,, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

transferred to the directors and their family members at much lower price. “24. in the present case, since no incriminating material was found, therefore, the addition made by the ao u/s 153a of the act was not justified. 26. a similar view has been taken by the hon'ble jurisdictiona l high court in the case