PUBLICIS COMMUNICATIONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, for assessment year 2012 – 13, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes whereas the cross objection of the assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

Assessing Officer for verification and granting credit may be given. 017. The learned Departmental Representative vehemently supported the order of learned lower authorities. 018. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the lower authorities. The fact shows that with respect to the international transaction of receipt of commission fee, client co- ordinate fees, advisory services

PUBLICIS COMMUNICATIONS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 7(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, for assessment year 2012 – 13, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes whereas the cross objection of the assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

Assessing Officer for verification and granting credit may be given. 017. The learned Departmental Representative vehemently supported the order of learned lower authorities. 018. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the lower authorities. The fact shows that with respect to the international transaction of receipt of commission fee, client co- ordinate fees, advisory services

M/S. INDIA MEDTRONICS PVT.LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA

In the result, similarly the Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal

Assessing Officer (‘AO’)”. “erred in fact and in law in upholding that Resale Price 3. Method (‘RPM’) is the most appropriate method”. “erred in upholding Medtronic International – Malaysia 4. Operations (‘Medtronic Malaysia’) as a comparable company in respect of import prices of goods purchased from associated enterprises (‘AEs’), in violation of the fundamental principles of Indian transfer pricing regulations, such

M/S. PFIZER LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT RG. - 8(2), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Saktijit Dey

Transfer Pricing Officer with regard to selection of most appropriate method. Pfizer Limited 28 35. In ground no.7, the assessee has challenged disallowance of depreciation claimed on assets of Ankleshwar plant. 36. Briefly stated the facts are, in the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that assessee has claimed depreciation on assets of Ankleshwar plant which has closed

BHAVANI GEMS P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT -5, MUMBAI

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Bhavani Gems Private Limited The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Dw–1370, G–Block West Core, Tax–5, Room No. 515, 5Th Floor, Bharat Diamond Bourse, Bandra Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai–400 020 Mumbai–400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecb9471D

Transfer Pricing Officer should not have been made by the learned Assessing Officer as such. Therefore, the PCIT should not have directed the learned Assessing Officer to do same thing, which is not in accordance with the circular issued. iv. He also referred to the decision of the co- ordinate bench in ITA No. 2/ Jodh/ 2021 in case

SHAPOORJI PALLONJI AND COMPANY PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(3), MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

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

transfer, assign, dispose off, place, charge or create any lien on these shareholdings. 3. They will furnish details in agreed format every year. 4. The bank can inspect the records of the assessee. In view of the above, it can be seen that assessee has merely given undertaking to not divest its shareholdings in the AE. In view

SHAPOORJI PALLONJI AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -3(3)(1), MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

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

transfer, assign, dispose off, place, charge or create any lien on these shareholdings. 3. They will furnish details in agreed format every year. 4. The bank can inspect the records of the assessee. In view of the above, it can be seen that assessee has merely given undertaking to not divest its shareholdings in the AE. In view

TPG CAPITAL INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 3(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Block, Bandra Kurla Complex ……………. Respondent Bandra (E), Mumbai 400 051 PAN – AABCN660K Revenue by : Shri Manish K. Singh Assesseeby : Shri Porus Kaka a/w Shri Manish Kanth Date of Hearing – 10.06.2019 Date of Order – 21.06.2019 2 TPG Capital India Pvt. Ltd. O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY. J.M. Aforesaid cross appeals arise out of the order dated 23rd December

DCIT CIR. 7(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. GUJARAT GLASS LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS M/S. PIRAMAL GLASS LTD.), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

block of assets was disallowed by the Tribunal in assessment year 1999–2000. Following the same, learned Commissioner (Appeals) disallowed assessee’s claim of depreciation on non–compete fee capitalized over various assets. However, following the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2001–02, he allowed assessee’s claim of depreciation

THOMAS COOK (INDIA) LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL/ JT/ DY/CIT/ASSTT/ITO, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Ble

transfers ownership of the assets to the lessee by the end of the lease term; (b) lessee has the option to purchase the asset at a price i.e., accepted to be sufficiently lower than the fair market value.; Page No. 41 ITA NO. 752 & 2541/MUM/2022 (A.Y. 2017-18 & 2018-19) Thomas Cook (India) Limited (c) the lease term

ITO 10(3)(4), MUMBAI vs. KEYSTONE SOLUTION P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

Block no.48, DEF Godrej Industries Complex Pirojshshnagar Gate no.4 ……………. Respondent Eastern Express Highway Vikhroli (E), Mumbai 400 079 PAN – AACCS7667Q Revenue by : Shri N.K. Chand Assessee by : Shri M. Muzali Date of Hearing – 21.07.2016 Date of Order – 19.10.2016 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. Captioned appeal at the instance of the Revenue is directed against the order

FRANKLIN TEMPLETON INTERNATIONAL SERVICES (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

block of assets of Computer, Plant and Machinery, Building consequent to disallowance of revenue expenditure in the assessment orders of assessment year 2004-05, 2005- 06 and 2006-07. Assessment Year 2010-11 Ground 1 Transfer Pricing

TUBACEX PRAKASH INDIA P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL/JT/CY/ASSTT/CIT/ ITO, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE,, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed on the additional grounds

Bench: Us, First We Would Like To Address Ground No.3 Wherein The Assessee Has Submitted That The Order Of The Ld. Tpo U/S.92Ca(3) Of The Act Dated 01/11/2019 Is Barred By Limitation & Hence, Invalid In Law.

Block, Bandra Kurla And Complex Deputy Commissioner of Bandra (E) Income Tax-circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai PAN/GIR No.AAFCT3158G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Percy Pardiwala & Shri Ninad Patade Revenue by Dr. Samuel Pitta Date of Hearing 23/03/2023 Date of Pronouncement 24/03/2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. DDIT(IT) 2 (1), MUMBAI

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

Block\nBehind MCA Club, Bandra Kurla Complex\nBandra (E), Mumbai – 400051\nPAN: AABCS4681D\n(Appellant)\nV.\nAsst. CIT (Intl. Taxation)- 4(2)(2)\n17th Floor, Air India Building\nNariman Point\nMumbai - 400021\n(Respondent)\nAssessee Represented by\n: Shri Porus Kaka &\nShri Manish Kanth\nDepartment Represented by\n: Shri Anil Sant\nDate of conclusion of Hearing\n: 21.02.2024\nDate

CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LIMITED (SUCCESSOR TO CAPGEMINI INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,AIROLI, NAVI MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 55, MUMBAI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Block 3, Floor 4, C Wing, Thane-Belapur Road, Airoli, Navi Mumbai - 400708 [PAN: AABCM4573E] ……… Appellant Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-55, Hall-B, 5th Floor,Earnest House, Nariman Respondent ..……. Point, Mumbai - 400021 Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri M P Lohia Shri Nikhil Tiwari For the Respondent/Department : Shri Vachashpati Tripathi Date Conclusion of hearing : 16.04.2024 Pronouncement of order

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD)-4(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Citigroup Global Markets (India) Private Limited The Dcit 1402, 14Th Floor, Circle -4(1), First International Financial Aaykar Bhavan Centre, Vs. M.K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400 020 G Block, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No.Aaecs7234F Citigroup Global Markets (India) The Jcit (Osd) Private Limited 4(1)(1) 1402, 14Th Floor, Room No. 640, 6 Th Floor, First International Financial Aaykar Bhavan, Centre, Vs. M.K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, G Block, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Mr. Jasmin Amalsadwala, Ars Revenue By : Ms. Vranda U. Matkari, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 25/10/2023

Block, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Mr. Jasmin Amalsadwala, ARs Revenue by : Ms. Vranda U. Matkari, DR Date of hearing: 04/08/2023 Date of pronouncement : 25/10/2023 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: ITA Nos. 72 & 45/Mum/2018 Citigroup Global Market (India) Private Limited

CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Citigroup Global Markets (India) Private Limited The Dcit 1402, 14Th Floor, Circle -4(1), First International Financial Aaykar Bhavan Centre, Vs. M.K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400 020 G Block, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No.Aaecs7234F Citigroup Global Markets (India) The Jcit (Osd) Private Limited 4(1)(1) 1402, 14Th Floor, Room No. 640, 6 Th Floor, First International Financial Aaykar Bhavan, Centre, Vs. M.K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, G Block, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Mr. Jasmin Amalsadwala, Ars Revenue By : Ms. Vranda U. Matkari, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 25/10/2023

Block, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Mr. Jasmin Amalsadwala, ARs Revenue by : Ms. Vranda U. Matkari, DR Date of hearing: 04/08/2023 Date of pronouncement : 25/10/2023 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: ITA Nos. 72 & 45/Mum/2018 Citigroup Global Market (India) Private Limited

DOW AGROSCIENCES INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT RG 14(1)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Sooddow Agrosciences India Private Acit, Range-14(1)(2) Limited, 1St Floor, Block B, Room No. 460, Godrej It Park, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli (W) Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400079 Pan – Aaacd3812H (Appellant) (Respondent) It(Tp)A. No.203/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dow Agrosciences India Private Dcit, Range-14(1)(1) Limited, 1St Floor, Block B, Room No. 460, Godrej It Park, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli (W) Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400079 Pan – Aaacd3813H (Appellant) (Respondent) It(Tp)A. No.1528/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dow Agrosciences India Private Income Tax Officer , Range-14(1)(3) Limited, 1St Floor, Block B, Room No. 458, Godrej It Park, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli (W) Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400079 Pan – Aaacd3813H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Block B, Room No. 458, Godrej IT Park, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli (W) Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400079 PAN – AAACD3813H (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.1051/Mum/2015, ITA No.203/Mum/2016 & ITA No.1528/Mum/2017 2 A.Ys 2010-11 to 2012-13 Dow Agrosciences India Pvt. ltd. Vs. ACIT, Range-14(1)(2) Appellant by: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Senior Advocate a/w Shri. Hiten Chande Respondent