ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10(1), HYDERABAD vs. VERTEX PROJECTS LLP (FORMERLY M/S VERTEX PROJECTS LTD) , HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Acit,Circle-10(1) Vs. Vertex Projects Llp Room No.515, 5Th Floor, (Formerly M/S.Vertex A-Block, I.T.Towers, Projects Ltd.) A.C.Guards, #156-159, Paigah House Hyderabad. S.P.Road, Next To Pg College. Secunderabad-500 026. Pan : Aanfv0232C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sriram Seshadri, Ca Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar,Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.04.2023 O R D E R Per Shri Laliet Kumar, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Dated 16.03.2018 For The Ay 2014-15, On The Following Grounds :

section 147 / 148 of the Act, the coordinate Bench had held as under : “22. Coming back to our point we have to examine whether protective assessment/addition is possible under section 147 in respect of the same person and for the same period. When a regular assessment is made and later on it comes to the notice of the Assessing Officer

SUJIT AGARWAL ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Sujit Agarwal Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 2(2) Pan:Aclpa3197P Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Ch V Gopinath, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 09/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 22/11/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, Vice-This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.01.2019 Of The Learned Cit (A)-12, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2014-15. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & The Managing Director Of The Company, M/S. Sawaria Pipes Pvt Ltd. He Filed His Original Return Of Income For The Impugned A.Y On 30.12.2014 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.20,13,600/- & Agricultural Income Of Rs.70,200/-. A Search & Seizure Operation U/S 132 Of The I.T. Act Was Conducted In The Case Of The Assessee On 12.01.2016. In Response To Notice U/S 153A Of The Act Issued On 6.9.2016, The Assessee Filed His Return

prices when the business activity of the aforesaid company was not convincing. The Assessing Officer, in the light of the above, rejected the explanation of the assessee that the share transaction in M/s. NCL Research & Financial Services Ltd were done through the broker Nirmal Bang Securities and that the payment was made through RTGS drawn on Punjab National Bank

WATERMARKE RESIDENCY LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-17(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee vide ITA Nos

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

132. The interest receivable for the year amounts to US$2,966,608 (see note 5). 20. When both debtor( water mark) and creditor ( fair field) have categorized the transaction as loan in their respective financials there is no question of TPO artificially characterizing it as loan. In view of detailed discussion made above argument of assessee that CCDs

WATERMARK RESIDENCY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-17(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee vide ITA Nos

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

132. The interest receivable for the year amounts to US$2,966,608 (see note 5). 20. When both debtor( water mark) and creditor ( fair field) have categorized the transaction as loan in their respective financials there is no question of TPO artificially characterizing it as loan. In view of detailed discussion made above argument of assessee that CCDs

WATERMARK RESIDENCY LIMITED, ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-17(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee vide ITA Nos

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

132. The interest receivable for the year amounts to US$2,966,608 (see note 5). 20. When both debtor( water mark) and creditor ( fair field) have categorized the transaction as loan in their respective financials there is no question of TPO artificially characterizing it as loan. In view of detailed discussion made above argument of assessee that CCDs

ADP PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ground of appeal No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhassessment Year:2014-15

transfer pricing analysis / study prepared by the Appellant, without appreciating that none of the conditions mentioned in clauses (a) to (d) of Section 92C(3) of the Act were satisfied. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. TPO erred in and the Hon'ble DRP further erred in upholding / confirming

ZETA INTERACTIVE SYSTEMS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(4), HYDERABAD

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12

transfer pricing is not an exact science. It is difficult to find exact comparables particularly under TNMM. This constraint has been accepted by the ITAT, Delhi in the case of ST Microelectronics Ltd wherein the ITAT held: "ALP of an international transaction Cannot be determined 'accurately in accordance with a scientific formula. It is quite difficult to arrive

APACHE FOOTWEAR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NELLORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), TIRUPATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 92B, it is abundantly clear that the outstanding receivable by the assessee from its AE, is required to be benchmarked, so as to ensure that they should not be any shifting of profit from assessee to its AE. 14 Apache Footwear India Pvt.Ltd. 39. In the present case, the total turnover of the assessee in respect of Software Development

VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) was carried out in the case of the assessee company and its group on 14/03/2016 during which certain incriminating material was found and seized. Accordingly, notice under section 153A of the Act dated 17/07/2017 was issued and served on the assessee in response to which the assessee filed the return

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD vs. VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) was carried out in the case of the assessee company and its group on 14/03/2016 during which certain incriminating material was found and seized. Accordingly, notice under section 153A of the Act dated 17/07/2017 was issued and served on the assessee in response to which the assessee filed the return

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD vs. VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) was carried out in the case of the assessee company and its group on 14/03/2016 during which certain incriminating material was found and seized. Accordingly, notice under section 153A of the Act dated 17/07/2017 was issued and served on the assessee in response to which the assessee filed the return

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD vs. VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) was carried out in the case of the assessee company and its group on 14/03/2016 during which certain incriminating material was found and seized. Accordingly, notice under section 153A of the Act dated 17/07/2017 was issued and served on the assessee in response to which the assessee filed the return

VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) was carried out in the case of the assessee company and its group on 14/03/2016 during which certain incriminating material was found and seized. Accordingly, notice under section 153A of the Act dated 17/07/2017 was issued and served on the assessee in response to which the assessee filed the return

VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) was carried out in the case of the assessee company and its group on 14/03/2016 during which certain incriminating material was found and seized. Accordingly, notice under section 153A of the Act dated 17/07/2017 was issued and served on the assessee in response to which the assessee filed the return

VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) was carried out in the case of the assessee company and its group on 14/03/2016 during which certain incriminating material was found and seized. Accordingly, notice under section 153A of the Act dated 17/07/2017 was issued and served on the assessee in response to which the assessee filed the return

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD vs. VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) was carried out in the case of the assessee company and its group on 14/03/2016 during which certain incriminating material was found and seized. Accordingly, notice under section 153A of the Act dated 17/07/2017 was issued and served on the assessee in response to which the assessee filed the return

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD vs. VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) was carried out in the case of the assessee company and its group on 14/03/2016 during which certain incriminating material was found and seized. Accordingly, notice under section 153A of the Act dated 17/07/2017 was issued and served on the assessee in response to which the assessee filed the return

VARSHA VISWANATH PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) was carried out in the case of the assessee company and its group on 14/03/2016 during which certain incriminating material was found and seized. Accordingly, notice under section 153A of the Act dated 17/07/2017 was issued and served on the assessee in response to which the assessee filed the return

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. Y S JAGAN MOHAN REDDY, KADAPA

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is\nallowed

transfer of shares as\nagainst the value of Rs.800/- per share determined by the\nAssessing Officer.\n10. The CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the\nshares were purchased at two different rates of Rs.3001/-\nper share and Rs.1000/- per share within a span of one\nyear from two related parties and that the shares of M/s\nKealwan