THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIT(A) vs. M/S IDS SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT LTD

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),S.G.PANDIT

transfer pricing documents and proceeded to determine the arms length price of the international transactions of the assessee on the basis of the material available on record. The assessee raised objection before the Dispute Resolution Panel (for short ‘the DRP’) on the finding of the TPO. On consideration of the objections of the assessee, the DRP directed the Assessing Officer

WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit Writ Petition No.20040/2019 (T-It) Between:

transfer pricing adjustment actually was not determinative of the refund inasmuch as the tax 8 amount was paid based on book profit, as provided u/s 115JB; the entitlement of the assessee for interest u/s 244A(1A) is intended to bring parity in the converse situation where the Revenue levies interest on delayed payment of taxes as provided u/s 234B

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

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

SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 23.06.2015 PASSED BY THE ITAT, 'C' BENCH, BENGALURU, AS SOUGHT FOR, IN THE RESPONDENT-ASSESSEE'S CASE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS IN ITA NO.1050/DEL/2009 FOR A.Y.2004-05. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GENISYS INTERGRATING SYSTEMS

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

SET Date of Judgment 09-07-2018 I.T.A.No.17/2012 The Commissioner of Income-tax & Anr. Vs. M/s. Genisys Integrating Systems (India) Pvt., Ltd., 2/12 ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 05/08/2011 PASSED BY THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA No.1231/Bang/2010 ANNEXURE-D AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE

PR.COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S TRIANZ HOLDINGS PVT LTD

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

set off of brought forward losses of earlier years of other units is prescribed under the Act? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, that the Tribunal is right in law in confirming the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel with regard to reimbursement of expenses from transfer pricing

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

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

setting aside the determination of ALP on the International Transaction Payment of Technical Services Fees, directing the Transfer Pricing Officer to reconsider the issue on the most appropriate method and holding that the Transfer Pricing Officer cannot examine the payment commensurate to the volume and quality of services and recorded perverse finding? 2. Whether on the facts

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 vs. TOYOTA TSUSHO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE,C M JOSHI

SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 04.09.2024 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 'B' BENCH, BANGALORE, AS SOUGHT FOR, IN THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE'S CASE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS IN M.P.NO.63/BANG/2023 IN IT (TP) A NO.2806/BANG/2017 FOR A.Y. 2013-2014 (ANNEXURE-A) AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S EXIDE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

In the result, both the appeals stand dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to determine the Arm’s Length Price and the said officer did not suggest TP adjustment. Assessing Authority made non TP addition pertaining to surplus from shareholders account, treating the same as income from other business and losses from pension fund not allowed to be carried forward. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred appeals

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S EXIDE LIFE INSURANCE CO LTD

In the result, both the appeals stand dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to determine the Arm’s Length Price and the said officer did not suggest TP adjustment. Assessing Authority made non TP addition pertaining to surplus from shareholders account, treating the same as income from other business and losses from pension fund not allowed to be carried forward. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred appeals

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. CURAM SOFTWARE INTERNATIONAL

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

transfer pricing regulations in India does not provide for assumptions in respect of adjustments and recorded perverse finding? 8. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was correct in directing exclusion of telecommunication expenses and expenditure incurred in foreign currency from export turnover Date of Judgment 12-07-2018, ITA No.20/2014

M/S. TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTOR (P) LTD., vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

set aside and matter remitted back to him for fresh consideration as per law. Needless to say he can obtain required reports from the TPO for this purpose. Ground 7.8 to 7.12 of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes”. 3. The need to remand the matter back to the TPO/AO arose in view of the fact that

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX CIT (A) vs. M/S ACUSIS SOFTWARE INDIA PVT. LTD.

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

set out in section 10A and the decision relied upon by the Tribunal has not reached finality”? 2. “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in erred in excluding certain comparable from list of comparable on the ground of Date of Judgment 02-07-2018 I.T.A.No.443 /2017

THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S G T NEXUS SOFTWARE PVT LTD

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

loss account at page 1025. Schedule of Income indicates its operating revenue from software development, hardware maintenance, information technology, consultancy etc. Revenue from hardware maintenance stands at Rs. 3.92 crore, which has been considered by the Transfer Pricing Officer himself as sale of products. Such sale of products constitutes 15% of total revenue. There is no segmental information available

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

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GLOBAL E BUSINESS OPERATIONS PVT LTD

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN IT(TP)A NO.160/BANG/2014 DATED 28-02-2017 ANNEXURE - D CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BENGALURU & ETC. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY Dr. VINEET KOTHARI J. DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:- JUDGMENT Mr.Aravind

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIT(A) vs. M/S COMMSCOPE NETWORKS (INDIA) PVT LTD

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN IT(TP)A No.181/Bang/2016 DATED 22/02/2017 ANNEXURE-D AND CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE DRP CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), BENGALURU & ETC. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY Dr. VINEET KOTHARI J. DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:- JUDGMENT

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2 vs. M/S EYGBGS (INDIA) PVT LTD

The appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA

loss and voluntary Transfer Pricing adjustment shall be included in the total income of the assessee"? (2) "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal's order can be said as perverse in nature as Tribunal has failed to consider materials on record, findings of authorities and when conditions set