M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTING LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

block of plant & machinery& depreciation thereon, after reducing the capital subsidy, and therefore disallowed the claim of excess depreciation claimed to the extent of Rs.3,16,92,148/-. In the oral & written submissions, the ld. ARs vehemently argued against such action of the ld. AO. [Unquote] 2. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata in appellant

M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTING LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

block of plant & machinery& depreciation thereon, after reducing the capital subsidy, and therefore disallowed the claim of excess depreciation claimed to the extent of Rs.3,16,92,148/-. In the oral & written submissions, the ld. ARs vehemently argued against such action of the ld. AO. [Unquote] 2. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata in appellant

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTINGS LIMITED., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

block of plant & machinery& depreciation thereon, after reducing the capital subsidy, and therefore disallowed the claim of excess depreciation claimed to the extent of Rs.3,16,92,148/-. In the oral & written submissions, the ld. ARs vehemently argued against such action of the ld. AO. [Unquote] 2. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata in appellant

M/S. LEXMARK INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 14(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S.Godara

transfer pricing adjustments As regards, the determination of the Application of arm’ AO, I find that he cannot be faulted in the facts and circumstances emanating in the case. In summary, the grounds taken by the appellant-company stand dismissed, and the action of the Learned. AO is confirmed.” This is what leaves the assessee agreed against the impugned

M/S. LEXMARK INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 14(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S.Godara

transfer pricing adjustments As regards, the determination of the Application of arm’ AO, I find that he cannot be faulted in the facts and circumstances emanating in the case. In summary, the grounds taken by the appellant-company stand dismissed, and the action of the Learned. AO is confirmed.” This is what leaves the assessee agreed against the impugned

ACIT, CIRCLE-14(1), KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. M/S LEXMARK INTERNATIONAL INDIA PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S.Godara

transfer pricing adjustments As regards, the determination of the Application of arm’ AO, I find that he cannot be faulted in the facts and circumstances emanating in the case. In summary, the grounds taken by the appellant-company stand dismissed, and the action of the Learned. AO is confirmed.” This is what leaves the assessee agreed against the impugned

TCG DIGITAL SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Ground No. 5 and 6 raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1571/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

Block-EP & GP, Salt Lake, Sector-V, Kolkata- 700091 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAECS 2000 B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri M.P. Lohia, CA & Shri Nikhil Tiwari, CA Respondent by : Dr. P.K. Srihari, CIT(DR) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 26/09/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 13/12/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini

M/S PRICEWATERHOUSE COOPERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Pricewaterhouse Coopers Private Limited……...............................……………………......Appellant Block-Ep, Plot –Y14 Salt Lake City Sector-V Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan : Aabcp 9181 H] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata……..........................…....Appellant Appearances By: Shri Kanchun Kaushal, A/R & Shri Bikash Kr. Jain, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Vijay Shankar, Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 25Th, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 29Th, 2020 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

assessment on the basis of the draft order. Such complete the assessment on the basis of the draft order. Such complete the assessment on the basis of the draft order. Such order i.e. the draft order becomes the final order when acceptances received or order i.e. the draft order becomes the final order when acceptances received or order

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee (in C

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

Assessment Year: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s. Tega Industries Ltd. price for the same. In Transfer Pricing two related parties are viewed as unrelated and transacting at arm's length. This being the cardinal principle, for this service the Assessee should also charge the price as two unrelated parties transacting at Arm's length do. In this back

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee (in C

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

Assessment Year: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s. Tega Industries Ltd. price for the same. In Transfer Pricing two related parties are viewed as unrelated and transacting at arm's length. This being the cardinal principle, for this service the Assessee should also charge the price as two unrelated parties transacting at Arm's length do. In this back

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee (in C

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

Assessment Year: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s. Tega Industries Ltd. price for the same. In Transfer Pricing two related parties are viewed as unrelated and transacting at arm's length. This being the cardinal principle, for this service the Assessee should also charge the price as two unrelated parties transacting at Arm's length do. In this back

M/S. PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY PHILIPS ELECTRONICS INDIA LITD.),KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 12(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2489/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S Philips India Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Circle-12(2), Kolkata (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) [Pan: Aabcp 9487 A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

price for Software Segment 5.1. The Learned AO, TPO and DRP erred in making an adjustment to the ALP of international transactions relating to software development services rendered by the Appellant and in not accepting the ALP of the international transaction as recorded in the books of accounts by the Appellant. 5.2. Without prejudice to the generality of the above

M/S PHILLIPS INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 612/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S Philips India Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Circle-12(2), Kolkata (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) [Pan: Aabcp 9487 A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

transfer pricing of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The claim of the Ld. AR is that the AMP transaction does not represent the international transaction between the AE’s therefore no question of determining the ALP of AMP transactions. We find force in the argument of the ld. AR in the given facts and circumstances. Therefore, in our considered view

M/S. BATA INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 365/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-05

transfer has been a continuous process and Bata India has been able to significantly enhance the value of its human capital through such trainings. Under the said guideline, the associated enterprise provided services in relating to selection, recruitment and assessment of people for current and future roles within the assessee. Further, the associated enterprise also provided other human resource related

DCIT, CIRCLE -2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BATA INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 365/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-05

transfer has been a continuous process and Bata India has been able to significantly enhance the value of its human capital through such trainings. Under the said guideline, the associated enterprise provided services in relating to selection, recruitment and assessment of people for current and future roles within the assessee. Further, the associated enterprise also provided other human resource related

M/S. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-4, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

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

transfer of depreciable assets was reduced from the opening WDV of the respective block of assets. After such reduction, none of the blocks ceased to exist and therefore only with reference to the resultant reduced WDV, the assessee was granted depreciation u/s 32 of the Act. In particular, our attention was drawn to Page 190 of the paper book, which

M/S. TCG LIFESCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Transfer Pricing Adjustment made on account of Guarantee fees charged to the Associated Enterprises. Ground No. 3 of the assessee’s appeal is accordingly allowed. 11 A.Y. 2013-2014 M/s. TCG Lifesciences Pvt. Limited 9. As regards the Ground No. 4, it is observed that the issue involved therein relating to disallowance under section 14A is also covered

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. DIC INDIA LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

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

transfer pricing M/s. DIC India Ltd. AYs- 2010-11 & 2011-12 proceedings u/s 92CA, the l-d. TPO had not drawn any adverse inference. On these cumulative facts therefore, I find that the Ld. AO has without any requirement introduced the 'necessity' test for deciding the allowability of the expenditure which is not prescribed by the Legislature in section