STAR TELEVISION ENTERTAINMENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT) 2(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

capital gains on transfer of channel “Star World” to “Star International Movies Ltd”, a Hong Kong based company. Aggrieved, the 4 ITA 1813 & 1814/Mum/2014 Star Television Entertainment Ltd & Star Asian Region FZ LLP assessee filed its objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP), who confirmed the TPO adjustment as well as the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The assessee

STAR ASIA REGION FZ LLC,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT) 2(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

capital gains on transfer of channel “Star World” to “Star International Movies Ltd”, a Hong Kong based company. Aggrieved, the 4 ITA 1813 & 1814/Mum/2014 Star Television Entertainment Ltd & Star Asian Region FZ LLP assessee filed its objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP), who confirmed the TPO adjustment as well as the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The assessee

VARIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAIQQQ vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT NFAC CETNRE ITO, MINISTRY OF FINANCE DELHI, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

Capital Gains (LTCG) to the extent of Rs. 1,26,00,000/- and the finance cost disallowed to the extent of Rs. 9,06,801/-. The AO passed the final assessment order as per the directions of the DRP against which the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee raised various grounds and sub-grounds with regard

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.),MUMBAI vs. DCIT, RANGE-1(1)(2), MUMBAI

TP)- \n2(1)(1), \nMumbai \n23.12.2019 \n143(3) \n2016-17 \nRevenue \n\n31 \n1891/Mum/2023 \nITBA/NFA \nC/S/250/202 \n2- \n23/1051775 \n738(1) \n31.03.2023 \nDCIT-1(1)(2), \nMumbai \n28.12.2019 \n143(3) \n2017-18 \nAssessee \n\n32 \n2046/Mum/2023 \nITBA/NFA \nC/S/250/202 \n2- \n23/1051775 \n738(1) \n31.03.2023 \nDCIT-1(1)(2), \nMumbai \n28.12.2019 \n143(3) \n2017-18 \nRevenue \n\n33 \n1892/Mum/2023 \nITBA/NFA \nC/S/250/202 \n2- \n23/1051778

ACIT CIR 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA ( FORMELRY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, (i) the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose (ii) the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and (iii) the Cross Objections filed by the assessee ...

Bench: Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal & Co 76/Mum/2013 (A.Y 2003-04) Novartis India Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income–Tax–14(1)(1) Inspire Bkc, 7Th Floor, Room No 432, Bandra Kurla Complex, Aaykar Bhawan, Bandra (E) M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. Aaach2914F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Deputy Commissioner Vs. Novartis India Limited Of Income–Tax–14(1)(1) Inspire Bkc, 7Th Floor, Room No 432, Bandra Kurla Complex, Aaykar Bhawan, Bandra (E) M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400020 Pan/Gir No. Aaach2914F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant (""यथ"/Respondent)

method of accounting for valuation of stock. Whereas the AO had dealt on the provisions of Sec145A of the Act and considered the facts and submissions and made addition of Rs.40,89,753/- and similarly made adjustment to the closing stock. 14 ITA. No. 2308&2188/Mum/2012 &C.O.76/Mum/2013(A.Y.: 2003-04) Novartis India Limited, Mumbai 15. The thirteenth disputed issue being

NOVARTIS INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 7(1), MUMBAI

method of accounting for valuation\nof stock. Whereas the AO had dealt on the provisions of\nSec145A of the Act and considered the facts and\nsubmissions and made addition of Rs.40,89,753/- and\nsimilarly made adjustment to the closing stock.\n15. The thirteenth disputed issue being the claim of bad\nand doubtful debts. the AO found that the assessee

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR DIGILINK LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

gains of eligible business for the first five years and upto 30% for the remaining five years in the ten consecutive assessment years out of the fifteen years starting from the time the enterprise started its operation. The legislature having ousted applicability of sub-section (1) and (2) in the opening sentence brought in for the purposes of time line

VODAFONE DIGILINK LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, NEW DELHI

gains\nof eligible business for the first five years and upto 30%\nfor the remaining five years in the ten consecutive\n assessment years out of the fifteen years starting from the\ntime the enterprise started its operation. The legislature\nhaving ousted applicability of sub-section (1) and (2) in\nthe opening sentence brought in for the purposes of time

DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI vs. ZENSAR TECHNOLOGIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.8389/मुं/2010 (िन.व. 2005-06) Dcit-2(3), Room No.555, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Zensar Technologies Ltd., Magnet House, 2Nd Floor, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacz 0742 K ....."ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Cit - Dr "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 22/08/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 13/11/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

gains was computed 9 based on sale of land admeasuring 71564 sq.mtrs. vide agreement dated 30/03/2005. As per clause -3 of the said agreement determination of final consideration was dependent on actual measurement of the land sold. Upon physical measurement jointly undertaken by the vendor (assessee) and the buyer it was found that the area of the land sold

DCIT - 1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORARTION LTD., MUMBAI

TP)- \n2(1)(1), \nMumbai \n23.12.2019 \n143(3) \n2016-17 \nRevenue \n31 \n1891/Mum/2023 \nITBA/NFA \nC/S/250/202 \n2- \n23/1051775 \n738(1) \n31.03.2023 \nDCIT-1(1)(2), \nMumbai \n28.12.2019 \n143(3) \n2017-18 \nAssessee \n32 \n2046/Mum/2023 \nITBA/NFA \nC/S/250/202 \n2- \n23/1051775 \n738(1) \n31.03.2023 \nDCIT-1(1)(2), \nMumbai \n28.12.2019 \n143(3) \n2017-18 \nRevenue \n33 \n1892/Mum/2023 \nITBA/NFA \nC/S/250/202 \n2- \n23/1051778 \n098(1) \n31.03.2023

JSW ENERGY (BARMER) LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed partly for statistical

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

TP adjustment of lower authorities to accept alternative TP adjustment of lower authorities to accept alternative TP adjustment of Rs.491.07 Lacs as worked out b Rs.491.07 Lacs as worked out by the assessee during y the assessee during proceedings before Ld. TPO based on LIBOR + spread of proceedings before Ld. TPO based on LIBOR + spread of proceedings before

TPG GROWTH II MAKETS PTE LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(1)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No. 4 raised by the Appellant is partly allowed

TP adjustment to INR 71,64,92,650. In doing so, the Ld. TPO/Ld. AO/Ld. DRP erred in: a) Disregarding CUP method as adopted by the Assessee for determination of ALP of sale of shares of QNPL, thereby ignoring the third-party transactions entered into by SIPL on the same day and same terms; b) Disregarding the valuation report issued

TRANSUNION INTERNATIONAL INC.,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMM. OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-4(1)(2), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

capital gains. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further objections before the DRP who confirmed the addition. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the final order of assessment passed by the AO as per the directions of the DRP. 4. With regard to the admission of the additional grounds No.13 & 14 raised vide letter dated 29.07.2024, we heard

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5(2)(1) , MUMBAI vs. M/S M.PALLONJI SHIPPING PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Accordingly uphold the decision of the CIT(A) on this issue. The cross objections filed by the assessee in this regard is dismissed

Bench: Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

TP adjustments also made an addition in respect of foreign exchange gain to the tune of Rs.4,23,32,112/- which has arisen out of the re-instatement of loans given to the AE. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). With respect to the notional interest charged on advances to the AE, the Ld.CIT(A) gave

DCIT 4(1), MUMBAI vs. HSBC SECURITIES AND CAPITAL MARKETS (INDIA) P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

TP Proceedings on the basis of Discounted Cash Flow Method (DCM) at Rs. 244 per share, which the TPO rejected and substituted the same with his own working on the basis of PECV Method thus arriving at value of Rs. 496 per share; this led to an adjustment of Rs. 932.34 Cr. The TPO held the excess amount paid

HSBC SECURITIES AND CAPITAL MARKETS (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

TP Proceedings on the basis of Discounted Cash Flow Method (DCM) at Rs. 244 per share, which the TPO rejected and substituted the same with his own working on the basis of PECV Method thus arriving at value of Rs. 496 per share; this led to an adjustment of Rs. 932.34 Cr. The TPO held the excess amount paid

HSBC SECURITIES AND CAPITAL MARKETS (I) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

TP Proceedings on the basis of Discounted Cash Flow Method (DCM) at Rs. 244 per share, which the TPO rejected and substituted the same with his own working on the basis of PECV Method thus arriving at value of Rs. 496 per share; this led to an adjustment of Rs. 932.34 Cr. The TPO held the excess amount paid

ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI vs. HDFC LTD, MUMBAI

TP)- \n2(1)(1), \nMumbai \n23.12.2019 \n143(3) \n2016-17 \nRevenue \n\n31 \n1891/Mum/2023 \nITBA/NFA \nC/S/250/202 \n2- \n23/1051775 \n738(1) \n31.03.2023 \nDCIT-1(1)(2), \nMumbai \n28.12.2019 \n143(3) \n2017-18 \nAssessee \n\n32 \n2046/Mum/2023 \nITBA/NFA \nC/S/250/202 \n2- \n23/1051775 \n738(1) \n31.03.2023 \nDCIT-1(1)(2), \nMumbai \n28.12.2019 \n143(3) \n2017-18 \nRevenue \n\n33 \n1892/Mum/2023 \nITBA/NFA \nC/S/250/202 \n2- \n23/1051778

THE DY CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. VODAFONE WEST LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

gains\nderived by the undertaking from the eligible business, and the business of\nleasing out of assets is not one such business as referred to in section 80-\nIA(4) of the Act. The AO further held that the income relating to such sharing\nof infrastructure with other operators is not related to providing\ntelecommunication services by the assessee