SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

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

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

transfer price of power in terms of Sec. 92F(ii), keeping in mind, that in case of the Appellant, (1) it has incurred huge capex, for setting up the power undertaking exclusively for the CMUs and (2) it provides un- interrupted power to CMUs. Alternatively, 15% markup may be allowed for each of the aforesaid advantages to the actual user

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, AJMER, AJMER

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

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

transfer price of power in terms of Sec. 92F(ii), keeping in mind, that in case of the Appellant, (1) it has incurred huge capex, for setting up the power undertaking exclusively for the CMUs and (2) it provides un- interrupted power to CMUs. Alternatively, 15% markup may be allowed for each of the aforesaid advantages to the actual user

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. SHREE CEMENT LTD, BEAWAR

transfer price of power in\nterms of Sec. 92F(ii), keeping in mind, that in case of the\nAppellant, (1) it has incurred huge capex, for setting up the power\nundertaking exclusively for the CMUs and (2) it provides un\ninterrupted power to CMUs. Alternatively, 15% markup may be\nallowed for each of the aforesaid advantages to the actual user

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, AJMER, AJMER

transfer price of power in \nterms of Sec. 92F(ii), keeping in mind, that in case of the \nAppellant, (1) it has incurred huge capex, for setting up the power \nundertaking exclusively for the CMUs and (2) it provides un \ninterrupted power to CMUs. Alternatively, 15% markup may be \nallowed for each of the aforesaid advantages to the actual user

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Transfer Pricing. 5. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (A) NFAC Delhi was justified in allowing the appeal of the assessee by deleting the disallowance of Rs. 62,34,41,568/- on account of sales tax subsidy and electricity duty exemptions

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BANGUR NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Transfer Price for Power undertaking u/s 80IA. b) Claim of deduction u/s 80IA on eligible Solid Waste Management System as per Form 10CCB filed alongwith return of income. c) Allowability of depreciation on leasehold rights on land u/s 32(1)(ii). That the department is in further appeal against the composite order of Hon'ble ITAT in appeal

KOTHARI JEWELS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Transfer Pricing, present case of sale to the sister concern are not covered within its ambit. 3.11 Assessee company has all the right to sell its goods at a price, mutually negotiated, found prudent as a businessman provided there is no allegation of any receipt over and above the declared consideration. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

M/S SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,E-8, EPIP RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA, SITAPURA, JAIPUR vs. PCIT, JAIPUR-2, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Transfer Pricing Officer" shall have the same meaning as assigned to it in the Explanation to section 92CA.] (2) No order shall be made under sub-section (1) after the expiry of two years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be revised was passed. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section

CASTAMET WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED,KHARWA vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UDAIPUR

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be] shall be deemed to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, if, in the opinion se the Principal [Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner Principal] Commissioner or Commissioner, - (a) the order is passed without making inquiries or verification which should have been made

SHRI RUPAL JAIAN,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Date Of Appeal.

exemption under section 10(38) of the IT Act, 1961 as under :- Name of company Sale price Purchase price Transfer

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD, KOTA

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

transfer price is appropriate. It may be mentioned that as pointed out by the appellant, the extinguishment of investments in CTL, owing to its merger with CVL, is not covered under the exceptions provided in section 47 of the Act. Section 47(vii), which exempts

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD, KOTA

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

transfer price is appropriate. It may be mentioned that as pointed out by the appellant, the extinguishment of investments in CTL, owing to its merger with CVL, is not covered under the exceptions provided in section 47 of the Act. Section 47(vii), which exempts

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD., KOTA

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

transfer price is appropriate. It may be mentioned that as pointed out by the appellant, the extinguishment of investments in CTL, owing to its merger with CVL, is not covered under the exceptions provided in section 47 of the Act. Section 47(vii), which exempts

KANTA AGARWAL ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

exemption under section 10(38) of the IT Act, 1961 from bogus scrip transactions during the year as under :- Name of Sale price Purchase price Transfer

KANTA DEVI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(5), JAIPUR

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

exemption under section 10(38) of the IT Act, 1961 from bogus scrip transactions during the year as under :- Name of Sale price Purchase price Transfer

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD., KOTA

exemption for the Indian shareholder,\ncapital gains on transfer of shares of CFCL Technologies is taxable in the\nhands of Chambal Fertilisers. Consequently, capital loss (if any) is also to\nbe allowed in the hands of Chambal Fertilisers.\"\nThat is how, the Assessing Officer withdrew short capital loss of Rs.\n3, 91, 92, 69,355/-.\n030\nITA

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD, KOTA

exemption for the Indian shareholder,\ncapital gains on transfer of shares of CFCL Technologies is taxable in the\nhands of Chambal Fertilisers. Consequently, capital loss (if any) is also to\nbe allowed in the hands of Chambal Fertilisers.\"\nThat is how, the Assessing Officer withdrew short capital loss of Rs.\n3, 91, 92, 69,355/-.\n030\nITA

SMT. BIRMA DEVI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated

Bench: The Hearing Of This Appeal.”

exemption u/s 54 and 54EC. As observed above as per Section 45 r.w.s 48 whole of the consideration, received or accrued has to be taxed. Every person is supposed to know the law and if the transaction is structured in such a way for the transfer of capital asset that some of the consideration would be received later then such