MENZIES BOBBA GROUND HANDLING SERVICES P. LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRLCE-16(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

TP adjustment by considering 7.5% as the acceptable percentage of payment of technical service fee paid by another company as ALP for assessee's international transaction. Page 2 of 10 ITA Nos. 863 & 864/Hyd/2016 5. Assessee, therefore, filed these appeals. It is the argument of the learned AR that re-characterization of the transaction relating to payment for technical services

MENZIES BOBBA GROUND HANDLING SERVICES P. LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRLCE-16(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

TP adjustment by considering 7.5% as the acceptable percentage of payment of technical service fee paid by another company as ALP for assessee's international transaction. Page 2 of 10 ITA Nos. 863 & 864/Hyd/2016 5. Assessee, therefore, filed these appeals. It is the argument of the learned AR that re-characterization of the transaction relating to payment for technical services

INFOR (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS ') amounting to Rs. 3,01,408 attributable to Infor (Bangalore) Private Limited and Rs. 3,49,350 attributable to Approva Systems Private Limited ('transferor companies') which were amalgamated with Appellant with effect from 01 April 2015. 18. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld AO erred in not granting credit

SATYAM VENTURE ENGINEERING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED ,SECUNDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(2), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita-Tp No. 192/Hyd/2021 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Satyam Venture Assistant Commissioner Engineering Services Vs. Of Income Tax, Private Limited, Central Circle-3(2), Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan No. Aafcs3287D] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

method and the assessee has rendered similar services to both the AEs and non- AEs, and the non- AE transaction satisfy the internal TNMM. The AO, therefore, ought to have considered them for arriving at the ALP. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to remit this issue to the file of the AO with a direction to consider only

PURPLETALK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-9(1), HYDERABAD

method, but the TPO rejected it, conducting a fresh study and making an adjustment. The assessee also raised issues regarding the disallowance of ESI contribution and interest on TDS default.", "held": "The Tribunal addressed several grounds of appeal. It dismissed general grounds, rejected the assessee's argument for using internal TNMM, and upheld the rejection of the assessee's TP

M/S KANTAR GDC INDIA PVT. LTD. (FORMERLY TNS INDIA PVT LTD),HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.2261/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Kantar Gdc India (P) Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Ltd (Formerly Tns India (P) Circle 2(2) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabcn2278F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate Harpreet Singh Ajmani राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shiva Sewak, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 आदेश/Order

method. 5. The Assessing Officer has passed the draft assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 92CA of the I.T. Act on 26.12.2016 in pursuant to TP adjustment as suggested by the TPO and has proposed TP adjustment in respect of provision for ITES Services and management fees paid to AE. The learned Assessing Officer had also proposed addition towards trade

CONCENTRIX CATALYST TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE - 1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in\nterms of our aforesaid observations

method to identify the comparative\nborrowings from the sources namely RBI, Thomas Reuters LPC Loan calculator and Bloomberg to\nconclude the same at ALP, thus warranting no TP adjustment.\nTP adjustment in relation to provision of software development services by the Appellant to AE\n[INR NIL]\nThe below grounds are without prejudice to the fact that the TP adjustment

KNR CONSTRUCTIONS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

method of\ncomparability itself was altered by the Ld. DRP, the question of\nestoppel on the assessee does not arise. Therefore, it was\ncontended that the comparability of the Yedula Project with\nirrigation sub-contract projects requires factual verification.\nAccordingly, the Ld. AR prayed before the Bench for remand of the\nissue to the file of the Ld.AO/TPO

MANE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.686/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S Mane India (P) Ltd Vs. Acit Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Aaccm1243J Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate Mahima Goud राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. M. Narmada, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 06/05/2025 आदेश/Order

TP study, the assessee has benchmarked all its transactions by aggregating the above international transactions including the payment towards management and technical assistance services to the AE under TNNM as the most appropriate method. The TPO has held that the assessee has not furnished any details of formula that were transferred by the AE Page

SUSHEE INFRA & MINING LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly\nallowed for statistical purposes

TDS at Rs.9,42,69,564 as against\nRs. 10,21,50,744\n7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO erred\nin the levy of the interest under Section 234A and 234B of the Act\n8. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, vary and/or\nwithdraw any or all the above grounds

INVESCO(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -2 (1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

TP 4 ITA.No.111/Hyd./2022 adjustment/addition amounting to INR 3,49,915 by imputing interest, at a rate charged by SBI on short term fiend deposits, on outstanding receivables exceeding 30 days relating to sale of services to Al's as on March 31st 2017 and the Hon'ble DRP has further erred in upholding the action of Ld. TPO/AO

FACEBOOK INDIA SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-17(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Facebook India Online Services Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Private Limited, Of Income Tax, 12Th Floor, Building No.20, Circle – 17(1), Unit 1203 & 1204, Hitech City, Hyderabad. Madhapaur, Hyderabad. Pan : Aabcf5150G. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dhanesh Bafna & Chandni Shah Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.09.2022

method. The margin of the assessee under ITeS segment is determined as follows: ……….. 7.1.1. The arithmetic mean of the margins of the 11 comparable companies selected by the assessee in TPSR is 13.85% and accordingly, it was concluded that the international transaction of ITeS were at arm's length. 28 7.2. The ld. TPO made a TP adjustment in ITeS

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, HYDERABAD vs. FAIR FIELD DEVELOPMENT LIMITED , CYPRUS

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Fairfield Developments Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, Hyderabad. International Taxation – 1 Pan : Aabcf3158N Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 488/Hyd/2019 Assessment Year 2014-15 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Fairfield Developments Tax, Limited, International Taxation – 1, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabcf3158N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Akshay Surana & Siddharth Surana, C.A Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.04.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 10, Hyderabad Dated 16.01.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2 M/S. Fairfield Developments Limited

TP study, which is not permissible. Assessee had not given any reason for claiming the FCCD as equity. In our view the assessee cannot change the nomenclature of instrument from debt to equity for the purposes of bench marking the interest paid by its to AE, which would result into shifting of profit of assessee

FAIRFIELD DEVELOPMENT LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Fairfield Developments Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, Hyderabad. International Taxation – 1 Pan : Aabcf3158N Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 488/Hyd/2019 Assessment Year 2014-15 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Fairfield Developments Tax, Limited, International Taxation – 1, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aabcf3158N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Akshay Surana & Siddharth Surana, C.A Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.04.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 10, Hyderabad Dated 16.01.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2 M/S. Fairfield Developments Limited

TP study, which is not permissible. Assessee had not given any reason for claiming the FCCD as equity. In our view the assessee cannot change the nomenclature of instrument from debt to equity for the purposes of bench marking the interest paid by its to AE, which would result into shifting of profit of assessee

KALBURGI CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

method shows very high profit for itself as compared to comparables in the TO study. Thus the TPO was right in rejecting the TO study of the assessee. 2.4.8 Now coming to the determination of ALP for the intra group services, the assessee before this panel has stated that it benefited hugely in monetary terms as well as non-monetary

NEOVANTAGE BIO-TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE 5(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

TP addition of Rs.37,75,420/- on account of disallowances under section 14A of the Act and Rs.11,66,42,462/- on account of disallowance of set off of unabsorbed depreciation. Accordingly, the Ld. AO computed the total income of the assessee at Rs.12,04,17,883/-. 5. Aggrieved with the final assessment order of Ld. AO, the assessee

NEOVANTAGE INNOVATION PARK PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 16(3), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

TP addition of Rs.37,75,420/- on account of disallowances under section 14A of the Act and Rs.11,66,42,462/- on account of disallowance of set off of unabsorbed depreciation. Accordingly, the Ld. AO computed the total income of the assessee at Rs.12,04,17,883/-. 5. Aggrieved with the final assessment order of Ld. AO, the assessee

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1) , HYDERABAD vs. MARKET TOOLS & RESEARCH PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

TDS was deductible on such expenditure. 11. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. AO ought to have allowed 10A deduction on the expenditure disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia). 12. Disallowing the income tax expenditure of Rs. 5,91,248 without appreciating the fact that the Appellant has already disallowed such amount, thereby leading to double disallowance. 13. Not considering