PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5 vs. M/S NOVELL SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT (INDIA) PVT.LTD.

In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

disallowance made under Section 14A of the Act without the same is made in accordance with Rule 8D of I.T. Rules?". Thereafter, additional substantial question of law was formulated which reads as under: "Whether the direction issued by the Tribunal to the Transfer Pricing

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5 vs. M/S PAGE INDUSTRIES LTD

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

disallowance to the extent of adjustment on account of transfer pricing Rs.20,20,07,861/-, disallowance under Section 14A read

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S EDS ELECTRONICS DATA SYSTEMS INDIA PVT.LTD.

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Transfer Pricing Officer by order dated - 06.05.2006 considered the loss of 14.76% in the entire technical consultancy services agreement and was of the view that since, independent parties had an average margin of 17.02% therefore, there ought to be an adjustment. Thus, an adjustment of Rs.7,91,44,777/- was made. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer by an order dated

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S FOSROC CHEMICALS INDIA PVT LTD

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

Transfer Pricing Officer is required to determine the ALP of the International transaction but cannot examine whether there was any international transaction between the assessee and the AE and recorded perverse finding?” 6 2. We have heard Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants. 3. It may be recorded that the Tribunal while considering the relevant aspects at paragraphs

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S APIGEE TECHNOLOGIES

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

transfer pricing adjustment in accordance with parameters of I.T. Acta and Rules framed there under? 3.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the Tribunal is right in allowing the appeal filed by the assessee relating issue of TDS by erroneously holding that payments referred to in the assessment order are outside the purview of section 194C

SRI N GOVINDARAJU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeal stands disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

transfer of a capital asset and the latter would be the price that a capital asset would ordinarily fetch on sale in open market on the relevant date (i.e. 1.4.1981 in the case at hand). 31 In the present case, the assessee had provided the reasons for determining Rs.225/- per sq. ft. as the fair market value of the property

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

transfer pricing methods. Therefore, in such a situation, the perfect approach for indirectly bench marking royalty payments is to bench mark the profit margin left in the tested party, after payment of lump sum fee or royalty with the profit margins of comparable uncontrolled companies. The decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the assessee as Date of Judgment

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 vs. M/S TT STEEL SERVICE INDIA PVT LTD

Bench: V KAMESWAR RAO,S RACHAIAH

Transfer Pricing Adjustment to International Transaction with Associated Enterprises only even when same is contrary to Section 92CA of the Act and when assesse is providing service to both AE and Non-AE's where assesse has not made any bifurcation of profit in book of account as overall profit margin is recorded in books without any data

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Transfer Pricing Officer for determination of arms’ length price, who passed an order u/s 92CA. Assessment u/s 143(3) was completed and orders dated 28.03.2006 for assessment year 2003-04 was passed after making certain allowances/ disallowances

M/S WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Transfer Pricing Officer for determination of arms’ length price, who passed an order u/s 92CA. Assessment u/s 143(3) was completed and orders dated 28.03.2006 for assessment year 2003-04 was passed after making certain allowances/ disallowances

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S TEXPORT OVERSEAS PVT LTD

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

transfer pricing order under Section 92CA of the Act to determine arms length price as the assessee had entered into specified domestic transaction and on the 4 ground it was covered under Section 92BA of the Act. Despite objections being filed by the assessee before Dispute Resolution Panel (for short ‘DRP’) directions came to be issued

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S WIPRO LIMITED

In the result, the appeal is disposed of in terms

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to follow the directions given by the tribunal in earlier Assessment Year. The tribunal with regard to claim of assessee under Section 14A of the Act directed the Assessing Officer to follow the directions given the claim of the assessee under Section 14A of the Act set aside the finding recorded by the Assessing Officer

M/S ALTAIR ENGINEERING INDIA PVT LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Transfer Pricing is disposed off. 08. The second issue raised by the assessee is that disallowance of assessee's claim

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX-2 vs. M/S.EYGBS (INDIA) PVT LTD

Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE,C M JOSHI

Pricing Agreement [APA] and an adhoc disallowance of 10% of dividend income under Section 14A of the Act. 5. The Assessee is engaged in the business of providing back office support and data processing services to its customers. The Assessee had filed its return of income

M/S AMD FAR EAST LTD., vs. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Transfer Pricing Officer [TPO] for determining arm’s length price under Section 92CA of the Act. On receipt of the order passed under Section 92CA Act, the respondent passed the draft assessment order under Section 143[3] read with Section 144C of the Act, making certain disallowances

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GARNIWAL EXPORTS (P) LTD

Appeal is allowed

Bench: D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR,B.S.INDRAKALA

price or a premium to the quota which had been allotted to the assessee. In its return, the assessee had claimed in his returns that the consideration received for transferring the quota is akin to earning from export activity and had claimed the benefit of deduction as is provided under Section 80HHC of the Act. The Assessing Officer disallowed

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. M/S WIPRO GE MEDICAL SYSTEMS LTD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Transfer Pricing Officer’s order and other additions / disallowances 35 made, the loss have been converted into profit and accordingly

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO GE MEDICAL SYSTEMS LTD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Transfer Pricing Officer’s order and other additions / disallowances 35 made, the loss have been converted into profit and accordingly