DONGFANG ELECTRIC CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2563 & 2564/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09)

permanent establishment in India during FY 2006-07 should not be considered your 'associated enterprises' within the meaning of section 92A of the Act Without prejudice to the legal position that courts have interpreted the provisions of assessment and Chapter X harmoniously and broadly determined the roles of Learned Assessing Officer vis-a-vis Learned Transfer Pricing

DONGFANG ELECTRIC CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2563 & 2564/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09)

permanent establishment in India during FY 2006-07 should not be considered your 'associated enterprises' within the meaning of section 92A of the Act Without prejudice to the legal position that courts have interpreted the provisions of assessment and Chapter X harmoniously and broadly determined the roles of Learned Assessing Officer vis-a-vis Learned Transfer Pricing

M/S BALMER LAWRIES & CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(IT) WD-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 M/S Balmer Lawrie & Co. V/S. Income Tax Officer Ltd., 21, N.S.Road, (International Taxation), Kolkata-700 001 Ward-1(1), Aayakar [Pan No. Aabcb 0984 E] Bhawan (Poorva), 2Nd Floor, R. No.215, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata- 700 107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri M.K.Poddar, Sr-Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri C.P.Bhatia, Jcit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 18-02-2016 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-04-2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement

transfer. (b) Both the parties shall have the right to forward consolidations to the other party reflecting airfreight charges, valuation and related charges and Agent’s disbursements on a chargeable to consignee basis as the occasion demands. (c) Profit share will be on a 50/50 basis between BL and ABC and the profit is determined as the difference between

DONGFANG ELECTRIC CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. DDIT (IT)-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sri N.V. Vasudevan & Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy]

permanent establishment of a foreign company has to be 19 I.T.A. No. 572/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & I.T.A. No. 487/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dongfang Electric Corporation treated as separate entity for the purpose of transfer pricing

DONGFANG ELECTRIC CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sri N.V. Vasudevan & Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy]

permanent establishment of a foreign company has to be 19 I.T.A. No. 572/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & I.T.A. No. 487/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dongfang Electric Corporation treated as separate entity for the purpose of transfer pricing

I.T.O.,WARD-1(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S PCM STRESCON OVERSEAS VENTURE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both appeal preferred by the revenue (ITA No

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey]

transfer pricing adjustment of Rs.75,70,10,758/-to the total income of the assessee in his order dated 29.01.2016 passed u/s 92CA(3) of the Act. Consequent thereto, the AO served the order u/s 144C/143(3) of the Act dated 10.03.2016 on the assessee. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the TPO as well as the AO, the assessee

M/S PCM STRESCON OVERSEAS VENTURE LTD.,SILIGURI vs. PCIT-1, , KOLKATA

In the result, both appeal preferred by the revenue (ITA No

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey]

transfer pricing adjustment of Rs.75,70,10,758/-to the total income of the assessee in his order dated 29.01.2016 passed u/s 92CA(3) of the Act. Consequent thereto, the AO served the order u/s 144C/143(3) of the Act dated 10.03.2016 on the assessee. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the TPO as well as the AO, the assessee

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]

established that even without acquisition of an asset, a right of a permanent advantage could. be acquired and the cost of acquisition of such a right could, he taken to be capital expenditure. In the instant case, the assessee shall not be entitled to use the Licensed Information and it had to deliver up to its AE all such Licensed

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]

established that even without acquisition of an asset, a right of a permanent advantage could. be acquired and the cost of acquisition of such a right could, he taken to be capital expenditure. In the instant case, the assessee shall not be entitled to use the Licensed Information and it had to deliver up to its AE all such Licensed

M/S. TDK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EPCOS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),NADIA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1) , KOLKATA

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2014-15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2015-16, is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Permanent Establishment (PE) within the meaning of Article 5(2)(1) of the DTAA between India and USA. However, in the present case, the factual dispute is as to whether the IT services received by the assessee under the aforesaid agreement was in the nature of stewardship services or not. To this extent, we conclude that the aforesaid decision

M/S. TDK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EPCOS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),NADIA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1) , KOLKATA

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2014-15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2015-16, is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Permanent Establishment (PE) within the meaning of Article 5(2)(1) of the DTAA between India and USA. However, in the present case, the factual dispute is as to whether the IT services received by the assessee under the aforesaid agreement was in the nature of stewardship services or not. To this extent, we conclude that the aforesaid decision

DCIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S AKZO NOBEL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am]

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) in the present case in his order passed u/s.92CA(3) of the Act dated 30.1.2013 discussed the OECD guidelines & US Regulations on shareholder activity. The Assessing Officer is required under the provisions of Sec.92CA of the Act, wherever ALP has to be determined to make a reference to TPO to determine ALP of an international Transaction

M/S AKZO NOBEL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am]

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) in the present case in his order passed u/s.92CA(3) of the Act dated 30.1.2013 discussed the OECD guidelines & US Regulations on shareholder activity. The Assessing Officer is required under the provisions of Sec.92CA of the Act, wherever ALP has to be determined to make a reference to TPO to determine ALP of an international Transaction

GIFFORD & PARTNERS LTD.(SINCE MERGED WITH GIFFORD LLP),KOLKATA vs. DDIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1489/Kol/11 is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2007-08

price may be taxed in the other State but only so much of them as is directly or indirectly attributable to that permanent establishment.” The Assessee in this regard drew attention of the DRP to the commentary of Klaus Vogel on Double Taxation Conventions, wherein it has been stated as under: "As regards the profits made by the enterprise

GIFFORD & PARTNERS LTD.(SINCE MERGED WITH GIFFORD LLP),KOLKATA vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1489/Kol/11 is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2007-08

price may be taxed in the other State but only so much of them as is directly or indirectly attributable to that permanent establishment.” The Assessee in this regard drew attention of the DRP to the commentary of Klaus Vogel on Double Taxation Conventions, wherein it has been stated as under: "As regards the profits made by the enterprise

DCI INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-10(1) KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh, I.T. A.No. 126 /Kol/2017 Assessment Years: 2010-11 Dic India Ltd. Dcit, Cir-10(1), Kolkata -Vs- [Pan :Aabbcc0703C] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant Sri D. S. Damle, Fca Sri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit, Dr. For The Respondent Date Of Hearing 22.03.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 05.04.2017

price for acquisition of any capital asset." 7. Mr. Majumdar submitted that considering the fact that the payment made by the assessee is on account of a license fee and considering that the Supreme Court was considering an identical question in the case of I.A.E.C. (Pumps) Ltd. (supra) the question should. be answered in favour of the assessee

DCIT,CIR - 2(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ITC INFOTECH INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.67/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit, Circle-2(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Itc Infotech India Ltd. 37, J.L Nehru Road, Kolkata – 700071. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaci7376Q (Appellant/Revenue) .. (Assessee ) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.485/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Itc Infotech India Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1), Kolkata 37, J.L Nehru Road, Kolkata – 700071. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaci7376Q (Assessee ) .. (Revenue) Appellant/Revenue By : Dr. P. K. Srihari, Cit(Dr) Assessee By : Shri J. P Khaitan, Sr. Adv. & Bikash Chanda, Fca सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/10/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: These Revenue’S & Assessee’S Cross Appeal For Assessment Year 2008-09 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - Vi, Kolkata Dated 24.10.2014 Passed In Case No.Tp-07/Cit(A)-Vi/R-2/2012-13/Kol Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. We Come To The Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.67/Kol/2015. Its First Substantive Ground Pleads That The Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Reversing The

Transfer Pricing Officer had rightly excluded the loss making comparable entities. We see no reason to express our concurrence with the Revenue’s instant grievance. It emerges that the assessee has succeeded from the very issue of inclusion of loss making entities in preceding as well as succeeding assessment years. We find that this Revenue has failed to justify exclusion

M/S ITC INFOTECH INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR - 2(1),, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.67/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit, Circle-2(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Itc Infotech India Ltd. 37, J.L Nehru Road, Kolkata – 700071. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaci7376Q (Appellant/Revenue) .. (Assessee ) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.485/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Itc Infotech India Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1), Kolkata 37, J.L Nehru Road, Kolkata – 700071. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaci7376Q (Assessee ) .. (Revenue) Appellant/Revenue By : Dr. P. K. Srihari, Cit(Dr) Assessee By : Shri J. P Khaitan, Sr. Adv. & Bikash Chanda, Fca सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/10/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: These Revenue’S & Assessee’S Cross Appeal For Assessment Year 2008-09 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - Vi, Kolkata Dated 24.10.2014 Passed In Case No.Tp-07/Cit(A)-Vi/R-2/2012-13/Kol Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. We Come To The Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.67/Kol/2015. Its First Substantive Ground Pleads That The Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Reversing The

Transfer Pricing Officer had rightly excluded the loss making comparable entities. We see no reason to express our concurrence with the Revenue’s instant grievance. It emerges that the assessee has succeeded from the very issue of inclusion of loss making entities in preceding as well as succeeding assessment years. We find that this Revenue has failed to justify exclusion