AT&S INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KARNATAKA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am At&S India Private Limited Vs. Dcit, Circle 11(1), Kolkata P-7, Chowringhee Square, 12A, Industrial Area, Nanjangud – 571 301 Kolkata – 700 069. Mysore District, Karnataka, India "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaeca 2930 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

disallowance without appreciating that the Ld. AO in the draft assessment order under section 143(3) read with 144C(1) of the Act did not make any adverse comment under section 37 (1) of the Act in respect of the said transaction after examining the details of the said transaction submitted by the appellant to the Ld. TPO and subsequently

MADHU JAYANTI INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 214/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Madhu Jayanti International Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Cc-4(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aabcm 7502 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

92D. If any one of such circumstances exists, the Assessing Officer may reject the price adopted by (he assessee and determine the arm's length price in accordance with the same rules. " The principle coming out of the CBDT circular above has also been implicitly brought out by the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("ITAT"), Delhi bench in Mentor

M/S TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

3 and 4.8 of the said deed dated August 24, 2009 were understood by the Appellant and by TGBIL in the manner recorded in a letter dated 23 March 2010, filed through an affidavit before the Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“Hon’ble Tribunal”) dated June 13, 2022, exchanged between the Appellant and TGBIL. The Appellant also states that

M/S TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

3 and 4.8 of the said deed dated August 24, 2009 were understood by the Appellant and by TGBIL in the manner recorded in a letter dated 23 March 2010, filed through an affidavit before the Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“Hon’ble Tribunal”) dated June 13, 2022, exchanged between the Appellant and TGBIL. The Appellant also states that

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. AT & S INDIA LIMITED, KARNATAKA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 1311/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata M/S. At&S India Ltd. 12A, Industrial Area, Vs Nanjangud Mysore District Karnataka - 571301 Pan : Aaeca2930J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Smt. Rituparna Sinha, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Gaurav Kanaujia, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/09/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Manish Borad:

92D and after considering such evidence as the Transfer Pricing Officer may require on any specified points and after taking into account all relevant materials which he has gathered, the Transfer Pricing Officer shall, by order in writing, determine the arm's length price in relation to the international transaction or specified domestic transaction in accordance with sub-section (3

DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. AT & S INDIA PVT. LTD., MYSORE

In the result, all three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. J.Sudhakar Reddy & Sh. A.T.Varkey

disallowance made by the Assessing Officers in respect reimbursement of IT cost. In view of our above submissions, it may please be appreciated that the reimbursement of cost made by the appellant to its associated enterprise was not chargeable to tax in India in the hands of associated enterprise since no profit element was added to the cost

DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S AT & S PVT. LTD., KARNATAKA

In the result, all three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. J.Sudhakar Reddy & Sh. A.T.Varkey

disallowance made by the Assessing Officers in respect reimbursement of IT cost. In view of our above submissions, it may please be appreciated that the reimbursement of cost made by the appellant to its associated enterprise was not chargeable to tax in India in the hands of associated enterprise since no profit element was added to the cost

N L C NALCO INDIA LTD PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS ONDEO NALCO INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm& Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

92D. According to assessee, If anyone of such circumstances exists, the AO may reject the price adopted by the assessee and determine the arm's length price in accordance with the same rules. However, an opportunity has to be given to the assessee before determining such price. Thereafter, as provided in sub-section (4) of section

NLC NALCO INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm& Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

92D. According to assessee, If anyone of such circumstances exists, the AO may reject the price adopted by the assessee and determine the arm's length price in accordance with the same rules. However, an opportunity has to be given to the assessee before determining such price. Thereafter, as provided in sub-section (4) of section

M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80-IA of the Act 5.1 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, The Ld. AO and Hon'ble DRP erred in not granting the deduction claimed by the Assessee under section 80-IA of the Act amounting to Rs. 4,88,57,264 on the contention

NOMURA RESEARCH INSTITUTE FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.CIRCLE-2(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Godara]

3) of the Act dated 31 August 2016 (‘final assessment order") making a disallowance of INR 10,626 under the normal provisions of the Act. Subsequent to the final assessment order, the assessee received a notice dated 6th January 2017 from the Transfer Pricing Officer (herein after referred as’ or ‘Ld. TPO’) under section 92CA(2) read with section 92D

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CERATIZIT INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 928/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-05 Acit, Circle-3(1), N.D. -Vs- M/S Ceratizit India Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aaccc 2210 P] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 995/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-05 M/S Ceratizit India Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Circle-3(1), N.D. [Pan: Aaccc 2210 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowance of Rs 1,47,00,813/- on accout of adjustment in Arm’s Length Price (ALP) in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5.1. The brief facts of this issue are that the assessee is engaged in the manufacture and trading of inserts i.e tungsten carbide cutting tools which are used for cutting, drilling, milling, threading metal

M/S. CERATIZIT INDIA (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 928/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-05 Acit, Circle-3(1), N.D. -Vs- M/S Ceratizit India Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aaccc 2210 P] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 995/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-05 M/S Ceratizit India Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Circle-3(1), N.D. [Pan: Aaccc 2210 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowance of Rs 1,47,00,813/- on accout of adjustment in Arm’s Length Price (ALP) in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5.1. The brief facts of this issue are that the assessee is engaged in the manufacture and trading of inserts i.e tungsten carbide cutting tools which are used for cutting, drilling, milling, threading metal

AT&S INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.77/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) At & S India (P) Ltd. Vs. D.C.I.T, Circle-11(1), Kolkata

section (1) and sub-section (2)of section 92C of the Act, which leads to violation of the provision of sub-section(3) of section 92CA of the Act read with sub-section (3) of section 92C of the Act. The relevant provisions of section 92C are given below for ready reference: “Section 92C: Computation of arm’s length price

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(2), GANGTOK, GANGTOK SIKKIM vs. SIKKIM STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED , GANGTOK SIKKIM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

3) The amount of under-reported income shall be,— (i) in a case where income has been assessed for the first time,— (a) if return has been furnished, the difference between the amount of income assessed and the amount of income determined under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 143; (b) in a case where no return

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EPCOS FERRITES LTD., (SINCE MERGED WITH M/S. EPCOS INDIA P. LTD.,), NADIA

In the result, the both appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed, except other ground no

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr.A.L.Saini, Am

92D/ Rule 10D). For the purpose of documentation, assessee can use data which is existing latest by the specified date referred to in Clause IV of Section 92F i.e. by due date of filing the return for that year i.e. by 31st October 2002. However, for the purpose of computing the arm's length price u/s 92C, as clearly laid

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

3 September 2015. In response to the notices u/s 143(2) of the Act, the appellant filed relevant details and/ or particulars as had been requisitioned by the Ld. Assessing Officer “the Ld. AO”) from time to time. 3.1 During the course of the assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO made a reference under section 92CA

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

3 September 2015. In response to the notices u/s 143(2) of the Act, the appellant filed relevant details and/ or particulars as had been requisitioned by the Ld. Assessing Officer “the Ld. AO”) from time to time. 3.1 During the course of the assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO made a reference under section 92CA

M/S PHILIPS INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

3. Persistent System Limited (a) Functionally not comparable – Persistent systems is engaged in provision of outsourced product development services for independent software vendors and enterprises, which is different in nature from IT services. The company derives income from both software services & products. (b) Segmental information not available – P&L shows income from “sale of software services & Products. However, no break