VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(3), HYDERABAD

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

transferred by the assessee to its subsidiaries during the year were working capital advances, which were later decided to be treated as investments, then the T.P. adjustment already made by the AO shall be revived and the assessment shall be completed accordingly.” 3. Mr. Sai fails to pin-point any distinction on the relevant facts involved in all these assessment

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. 500082 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE2-(3), HYDERABAD

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

transferred by the assessee to its subsidiaries during the year were working capital advances, which were later decided to be treated as investments, then the T.P. adjustment already made by the AO shall be revived and the assessment shall be completed accordingly.” 3. Mr. Sai fails to pin-point any distinction on the relevant facts involved in all these assessment

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , HYDERABAD

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

transferred by the assessee to its subsidiaries during the year were working capital advances, which were later decided to be treated as investments, then the T.P. adjustment already made by the AO shall be revived and the assessment shall be completed accordingly.” 3. Mr. Sai fails to pin-point any distinction on the relevant facts involved in all these assessment

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE2-(3), HYDERABAD

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

transferred by the assessee to its subsidiaries during the year were working capital advances, which were later decided to be treated as investments, then the T.P. adjustment already made by the AO shall be revived and the assessment shall be completed accordingly.” 3. Mr. Sai fails to pin-point any distinction on the relevant facts involved in all these assessment

AGRO TECH FOODS LIMITED., SEC'BAD,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Transfer pricing Officer ('TPO') under section 263 of the Act 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT has grossly erred in invoking the jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act for setting aside the order passed by the Ld. TPO under section 92CA

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

KAKINADA INFRASTRUCTURE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

253(5) of\nthe Act, we hereby condone the delay of 583 days in filing the\npresent appeals as we are satisfied that there was sufficient cause\nfor not presenting the appeals within the prescribed time and the\nappeals are hereby admitted for adjudication on merits.”\n4.2.\nTherefore, the Tribunal has considered the\nexplanation of the assessee as 'sufficient cause

WISSEN INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-17(2) , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

price (ALP) in respect of international transactions of the assessee company. The assessee company has entered into the following international transactions during financial year 2015-16: Sl.No. Associated Nature of Amount Method Enterprise Transaction 1 Wissen Software Rs.40,61,660/- TNMM Infotech Inc development USA Services 2 Wissen Trade Rs.3,92,31,581 Other Infotech In Receivables Method

WISSEN INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-17(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

price (ALP) in respect of international transactions of the assessee company. The assessee company has entered into the following international transactions during financial year 2015-16: Sl.No. Associated Nature of Amount Method Enterprise Transaction 1 Wissen Software Rs.40,61,660/- TNMM Infotech Inc development USA Services 2 Wissen Trade Rs.3,92,31,581 Other Infotech In Receivables Method

ASTRIX LABORATORIES LIMITED (AMALGAMATED WITH MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED) HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S. Astrix Laboratories Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Limited, (Amalgamated Of Income Tax, With M/S. Mylan Circle 16(2), Laboratories Limited), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aafca4120R. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri K.A. Sai Prasad. Revenue By: Sri Rajendra Kumar, Cit Date Of Hearing: 20.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.06.2022 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Of Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 16(2), Hyderabad Dt.31.03.2017 For The Assessment Year 2007-08 On The Following Grounds : “1. The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C & 92Ca Of The Income Tax Act, Passed On 31.03.2017 Is Contrary T The Facts & Law. 2. The Tpo Erred In Not Following The Hon’Ble Tribunal’S Directions & Thereby Making An Adjustment Of Rs.4,61,00,000/- U/S 92Ca Of The Act In Respect Of Sales Made To Associated Enterprises.” 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Under :

Section 92A of the Act, the case was referred to Transfer Pricing Officer (Additional Commissioner of Income Tax), who issued Transfer Pricing Order u/s 92CA of the Act dated 29.10.2010. The Assessing Officer framed Draft Assessment Order u/s 143(3) dated 31.12.2010 taking into account the above Transfer Pricing Order. The Assessing Officer vide his draft order has determined

JASPER AUTO SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2014-15 Jasper Auto Services Pvt. Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaccb 0196P (Appellant) (Respondent)

253/-, during the course of assessment proceedings, has not been authorised by the appellant. 4. The appellant may, add or alter or amend or modify or substitute or delete and / or rescind all or any of the grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 2. We notice at the outset that

HYDERABAD METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

transfer of land in relation to establishment of industrial estate or development of industrial areas and of setting up of industries cannot be said to be dealing in land or buildings for the obvious reason that the State is carrying out the objects of the Act with the Corporation as an agent in setting up industries in the State

DCIT, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE, HYDERABAD vs. HYDERABAD METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

transfer of land in relation to establishment of industrial estate or development of industrial areas and of setting up of industries cannot be said to be dealing in land or buildings for the obvious reason that the State is carrying out the objects of the Act with the Corporation as an agent in setting up industries in the State

JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD), CENTRAL CIRLCE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. MEDHA SERVO DRIVES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is allowed

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

transfer duty paid by the industry on financial deeds and mortgages etc. 3.1.4. 25% rebate on land cost in IEs/IDA's limited to Rs. 5.00 lakhs. 3.1.6. 15% investment subsidy on fixed capital investment will be given subject to a maximum of Rs. 15.00 lakhs. 3.1.7. An additional investment subsidy of 5% on fixed capital investment limited

JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD), CENTRAL CIRLCE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. MEDHA SERVO DRIVES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is allowed

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

transfer duty paid by the industry on financial deeds and mortgages etc. 3.1.4. 25% rebate on land cost in IEs/IDA's limited to Rs. 5.00 lakhs. 3.1.6. 15% investment subsidy on fixed capital investment will be given subject to a maximum of Rs. 15.00 lakhs. 3.1.7. An additional investment subsidy of 5% on fixed capital investment limited

IDEA CELLULAR LTD, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, TDS CIRCLE, WARD-1(1), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals under consideration are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

transferred to Distributor. The risk of stock remaining unsold, expired etc. is with Distributor. Also, it would demonstrate that the difference between price paid to Assessee and selling price to Retailer is on his own account and not on account of Assessee and hence the Assessee is not a 'person responsible for paying any income'. In fact, a mere purchase

IDEA CELLULAR LTD, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, TDS CIRCLE, WARD-1(1), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals under consideration are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

transferred to Distributor. The risk of stock remaining unsold, expired etc. is with Distributor. Also, it would demonstrate that the difference between price paid to Assessee and selling price to Retailer is on his own account and not on account of Assessee and hence the Assessee is not a 'person responsible for paying any income'. In fact, a mere purchase