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)

transfer pricing provisions in Chapter X was required. 5.1.4 The aforesaid claim finds strength from the following judgments:  ITAT(Delhi) in case of Kohinoor Foods Ltd. Vs. ACIT[67 SOT 108]  Delhi High Court in case of CIT Vs. Cotton Naturals (I) Pvt. Ltd, [276 CTR 475]  ITAT (Ahmedabad) in case of Micro Links Ltd. [157 TTJ 289]  ITAT(Delhi

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)

transfer pricing provisions in Chapter X was required. 5.1.4 The aforesaid claim finds strength from the following judgments:  ITAT(Delhi) in case of Kohinoor Foods Ltd. Vs. ACIT[67 SOT 108]  Delhi High Court in case of CIT Vs. Cotton Naturals (I) Pvt. Ltd, [276 CTR 475]  ITAT (Ahmedabad) in case of Micro Links Ltd. [157 TTJ 289]  ITAT(Delhi

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)

transfer pricing provisions in Chapter X was required. 5.1.4 The aforesaid claim finds strength from the following judgments:  ITAT(Delhi) in case of Kohinoor Foods Ltd. Vs. ACIT[67 SOT 108]  Delhi High Court in case of CIT Vs. Cotton Naturals (I) Pvt. Ltd, [276 CTR 475]  ITAT (Ahmedabad) in case of Micro Links Ltd. [157 TTJ 289]  ITAT(Delhi

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)

transfer pricing provisions in Chapter X was required. 5.1.4 The aforesaid claim finds strength from the following judgments:  ITAT(Delhi) in case of Kohinoor Foods Ltd. Vs. ACIT[67 SOT 108]  Delhi High Court in case of CIT Vs. Cotton Naturals (I) Pvt. Ltd, [276 CTR 475]  ITAT (Ahmedabad) in case of Micro Links Ltd. [157 TTJ 289]  ITAT(Delhi

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)

section 92CA(1) of the IT Act, 1961 was made by the Assessing Officer, to Ld. Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO). The assessee had not filed Form 3CEB along with its return of income for AY 2007-08.The assessee is a company incorporated in the People's Republic of China. It is engaged mainly in turnkey contracting and sub-contracting for power

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)

section 92CA(1) of the IT Act, 1961 was made by the Assessing Officer, to Ld. Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO). The assessee had not filed Form 3CEB along with its return of income for AY 2007-08.The assessee is a company incorporated in the People's Republic of China. It is engaged mainly in turnkey contracting and sub-contracting for power

EMAMI INDRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

price of the shares determined by SSKM Corporate Advisory P.Ltd. M/s. Emami Rainbow Niketan is a 100% subsidiary of M/s. Emami Realty Ltd. M/s. Emami Realt Ltd is a 100% subsidiary of M/s. Emami Infrastructure Ltd, the assessee herein. Therefore, two issues arise for our adjudication. These are:- a) The first issue is, whether there is a transfer of share

KRITIKA WIRES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.C.I.T.-2, KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2014-15

Transfer Pricing Officer. 6. The assessee in his submission has failed to provide any corroborative evidence in support of his claim that the assessment order is snot erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue. As no proper explanation has been furnished and it has been stated by the AO that the matter should have

D.C.I.T,CIRCLE-9(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S APOLLO GLENEAGLES HOSPITAL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for AY 2012-13 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

Transfer Pricing Officer at "nil".' This is a slender yet crucial distinction that restricts the authority of the TPO. Whilst the report of the TPO in this case ultimately noted that the ALP was 'nil', since a comparable entity would pay 'nil' amount for these services, this Court noted that remarks concerning, and the final decision relating to, benefit arising

D.C.I.T,CIRCLE-9(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S APOLLO GLENEAGLES HOSPITAL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for AY 2012-13 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

Transfer Pricing Officer at "nil".' This is a slender yet crucial distinction that restricts the authority of the TPO. Whilst the report of the TPO in this case ultimately noted that the ALP was 'nil', since a comparable entity would pay 'nil' amount for these services, this Court noted that remarks concerning, and the final decision relating to, benefit arising

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]

transferred or services provided in either transaction'. Specific attention was invited to rule 108(1)(a) of the Rules, which interalia reads as under: "Determination of arm's length price under section

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]

transferred or services provided in either transaction'. Specific attention was invited to rule 108(1)(a) of the Rules, which interalia reads as under: "Determination of arm's length price under section

AMBO AGRO PRODUCTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. THE PCIT, KOLKATA-1, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

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

108 - The Hon'ble High Court held that "the Income Tax Officer in the case had made enquiries in regard to the nature of the expenditure incurred by the assessee. The assessee had given a detailed explanation in that regard by a letter in writing. All these were part of the record of the case. Evidently, the claim was allowed

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]

Section 92C; the transaction was reported in the TPSR to be at arm’s length. The TPO rejected the application of RPM vis-à-vis the import of finished goods in absence of reliable data and sought to benchmark it under TNMM Method. The TPO also did not fully agree with the benchmarking exercise conducted by the assessee company

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]

Section 92C; the transaction was reported in the TPSR to be at arm’s length. The TPO rejected the application of RPM vis-à-vis the import of finished goods in absence of reliable data and sought to benchmark it under TNMM Method. The TPO also did not fully agree with the benchmarking exercise conducted by the assessee company

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am M/S Philips India Limited Dcit, Circle 11(1) 3Rd Floor, Tower-A, Dlf Park, Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, 08 Block Af, Major Arterial Chowringhee Square, Road, New Town (Rajarhat), Vs. Kolkata-700069, Kolkata-700156, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcp9487A Assessee By : Shri Ketan Ved, Ar Revenue By : Shri A. Kundu, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 07.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025

108,79,48,589/- on account of Intra Group Services (‘IGS’) received by the assessee. M/s Philips India Limited; A.Y. 2020-21 012. We note that this is a recurring issue in the case of the assessee which has been decided by the co-ordinate Bench in favour of the assessee in ITA No. 226/KOL/2021, vide order dated

DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. GUJARAT NRE COKE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy& Sri Aby T. Varkey)

108). 4.2. The Ld. CIT(A) while determining the ALP of interest on loan given to AE, held that (Comparable Uncontrolled Price] CUP is the Most Appropriate Method [MAM]. He disagreed with the order of the Ld. Transfer Pricing Officer that US LIBOR cannot be considered as a benchmark against US Dollar denominated loan. At para 4 of his order

DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. GUJARAT NRE COKE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy& Sri Aby T. Varkey)

108). 4.2. The Ld. CIT(A) while determining the ALP of interest on loan given to AE, held that (Comparable Uncontrolled Price] CUP is the Most Appropriate Method [MAM]. He disagreed with the order of the Ld. Transfer Pricing Officer that US LIBOR cannot be considered as a benchmark against US Dollar denominated loan. At para 4 of his order