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

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

transfer power directly to the ultimate industrial consumer i.e. the manufacturing units of assessee. 30.13. Further, the aspect as to why rate at which power is sold to 3rd parties including Power distribution companies should not be considered as internal CUP and hence considered for computing arm's length price under the Transfer Pricing regulations, needs to be dealt with

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

transfer power directly to the ultimate industrial consumer i.e. the manufacturing units of assessee.\n30.13. Further, the aspect as to why rate at which power is sold to 3rd parties including Power distribution companies should not be considered as internal CUP and hence considered for computing arm's length price under the Transfer Pricing regulations, needs to be dealt with

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. We further, from the facts of the assessee’s case as stated above, where there is both exclusivity (resulting in huge capex for single user) advantage and uninterrupted power supply, we on facts, agree with the assessee’s claim that Rs. 1.50/unit is the minimum reliability surcharge at arm’s length principles. As regards

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. We further, from the facts of the assessee’s case as stated above, where there is both exclusivity (resulting in huge capex for single user) advantage and uninterrupted power supply, we on facts, agree with the assessee’s claim that Rs. 1.50/unit is the minimum reliability surcharge at arm’s length principles. As regards

M/S ANGEL INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

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

prices. In view of the above we hereby undertake that we will forgo the claim of the losses on the following transaction: S. No. Description of the transaction Amount Involved F.Y. Involved 1. Loss on account of forfeiture of share 30 Cr 2008-09 application money by M/s HH Interior and Auto Component Pvt. Ltd. 2. Loss on account

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ANGEL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

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

prices. In view of the above we hereby undertake that we will forgo the claim of the losses on the following transaction: S. No. Description of the transaction Amount Involved F.Y. Involved 1. Loss on account of forfeiture of share 30 Cr 2008-09 application money by M/s HH Interior and Auto Component Pvt. Ltd. 2. Loss on account

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

transfer price of power. We further, from the facts of the\nassessee’s case as stated above, where there is both exclusivity\n(resulting in huge capex for single user) advantage and\nuninterrupted power supply, we on facts, agree with the assessee’s\nclaim that Rs. 1.50/unit is the minimum reliability surcharge at\narm’s length principles. As regards

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty is directed to be deleted and appeal of the assessee is allowed

transfer pricing adjustment/addition of Rs. 18,68,02,513/-and has Vaibhav Global Ltd. vs. ACIT stated that penalty U/s 271(1)(c) is leviable in accordance with explanation 7. Then, towards the end of assessment order, it has been stated that penalty proceedings U/s 271(1)(c) of the Act are initiated separately. 7. In the penalty order dated

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty is directed to be deleted and appeal of the assessee is allowed

transfer pricing adjustment/addition of Rs. 18,68,02,513/-and has Vaibhav Global Ltd. vs. ACIT stated that penalty U/s 271(1)(c) is leviable in accordance with explanation 7. Then, towards the end of assessment order, it has been stated that penalty proceedings U/s 271(1)(c) of the Act are initiated separately. 7. In the penalty order dated

WEALTHY SKY DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PR.CIT-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

transfer of the commodity or scrips: Provided that for the purposes of this clause- (a) a contract in respect of raw materials or merchandise entered into by a person in the course of his manufacturing or merchanting business to guard against loss through future price fluctuations in respect of his contracts for actual delivery of goods manufactured

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 Price of Power for the purpose of deduction u/s 80-IA of the Act. The said ground relates to non- consideration of component of reliability charge of Rs. 1.50 per unit which the power undertaking is eligible to charge for providing uninterrupted and quality power supply to the cement manufacturing units of the assessee. 3. Before

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

loss or \ndoes not have any chargeable profits, then no education cess is \npayable, but the assessee can carry on his business activity. In \nother words, the education cess is chargeable only in the event of \nchargeable profits being there and not otherwise. The relevant \nlegal precedents already cited clearly establish that education cess \nvery much falls within the mischief

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. M/S JAIPUR RUGS COMPANY PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes only

loss has to be given in computing of arm’s length price being the part of sale proceeds as well as comparable price. The adjustment on account of credit allowed to the AE beyond 60 days shall DCIT Vs. M/s Jaipur Rugs Co. Pvt. Ltd. be made at the time of determining the arm’s length price of sale transaction

JAIPUR RUGS COMPANY PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes only

loss has to be given in computing of arm’s length price being the part of sale proceeds as well as comparable price. The adjustment on account of credit allowed to the AE beyond 60 days shall DCIT Vs. M/s Jaipur Rugs Co. Pvt. Ltd. be made at the time of determining the arm’s length price of sale transaction

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. JAIPUR RUGS COMPANY (P) LTD., JAIPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes only

loss has to be given in computing of arm’s length price being the part of sale proceeds as well as comparable price. The adjustment on account of credit allowed to the AE beyond 60 days shall DCIT Vs. M/s Jaipur Rugs Co. Pvt. Ltd. be made at the time of determining the arm’s length price of sale transaction

JAIPUR RUGS COMPANY PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes only

loss has to be given in computing of arm’s length price being the part of sale proceeds as well as comparable price. The adjustment on account of credit allowed to the AE beyond 60 days shall DCIT Vs. M/s Jaipur Rugs Co. Pvt. Ltd. be made at the time of determining the arm’s length price of sale transaction

NEERU MOHAN NAGPAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO WARD 2(3)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

set off the loss\nunder capital gain head on the sale of property at SF 756, JMD mega\npolis IT park, Sohna Road, Gurgaon in the year under reference to the\nextent of capital gain available and the rest capital loss be allowed for\nset toff in if in the subsequent years.\nThe assessment order, the grounds of appeal

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)

price of power should further be increased by Reliability charge of Rs. 1.50 per unit while computing deduction u/s 80-1A of the Act as held in appellant's own case by this Hon'ble Tribunal for earlier years. [For Addl. Ground No.1] 3.0 Claim of deduction u/s 80-1A on eligible Solid Waste Management System

KOTHARI JEWELS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

price and this clearly shows that in the instant case, the assessee has not reflected true GP on its sale by stock transfer to its sister concerns and as per discussion above, the difference in gold rates on the date of transfer comes to Rs. 43,99,029/-. The AO thereafter worked out the average