ACCENTURE SERVICES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

3. As regards ITES segment, during the proceedings before the Transfer Pricing Officer the assessee furnished a fresh list of 15 comparables under Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) with average margin of 11.06% as against the margin shown by the assessee at 15.26%. Hence, the price charged to the AE was claimed to be at arm's length. The Transfer

GOLDMAN SACHS (INDIA) SECURITIES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL.C.I.T. RG.3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ashwani Taneja

3) read with section 144C(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), the Appellant respectfully submits that the learned A0 erred in passing the order on the following grounds: 1. In making an upward transfer pricing

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer- pricing officer to benchmark the interest as directed. 032. Accordingly, ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 033. Ground no. 2 and 3 of the appeal with respect to not considering the sale of empty containers, etc. as profit industrial unit for the purpose of deduction under Section 80IB of the Act. 034. The brief facts shows

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer- pricing officer to benchmark the interest as directed. 032. Accordingly, ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 033. Ground no. 2 and 3 of the appeal with respect to not considering the sale of empty containers, etc. as profit industrial unit for the purpose of deduction under Section 80IB of the Act. 034. The brief facts shows

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer- pricing officer to benchmark the interest as directed. 032. Accordingly, ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 033. Ground no. 2 and 3 of the appeal with respect to not considering the sale of empty containers, etc. as profit industrial unit for the purpose of deduction under Section 80IB of the Act. 034. The brief facts shows

DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(2), MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer- pricing officer to benchmark the interest as directed. 032. Accordingly, ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 033. Ground no. 2 and 3 of the appeal with respect to not considering the sale of empty containers, etc. as profit industrial unit for the purpose of deduction under Section 80IB of the Act. 034. The brief facts shows

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer- pricing officer to benchmark the interest as directed. 032. Accordingly, ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 033. Ground no. 2 and 3 of the appeal with respect to not considering the sale of empty containers, etc. as profit industrial unit for the purpose of deduction under Section 80IB of the Act. 034. The brief facts shows

ASST CIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer- pricing officer to benchmark the interest as directed. 032. Accordingly, ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 033. Ground no. 2 and 3 of the appeal with respect to not considering the sale of empty containers, etc. as profit industrial unit for the purpose of deduction under Section 80IB of the Act. 034. The brief facts shows

DCIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer- pricing officer to benchmark the interest as directed. 032. Accordingly, ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 033. Ground no. 2 and 3 of the appeal with respect to not considering the sale of empty containers, etc. as profit industrial unit for the purpose of deduction under Section 80IB of the Act. 034. The brief facts shows

ACIT CEN CIR 13, MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer- pricing officer to benchmark the interest as directed. 032. Accordingly, ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 033. Ground no. 2 and 3 of the appeal with respect to not considering the sale of empty containers, etc. as profit industrial unit for the purpose of deduction under Section 80IB of the Act. 034. The brief facts shows

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer- pricing officer to benchmark the interest as directed. 032. Accordingly, ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 033. Ground no. 2 and 3 of the appeal with respect to not considering the sale of empty containers, etc. as profit industrial unit for the purpose of deduction under Section 80IB of the Act. 034. The brief facts shows

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

transfer- pricing officer to benchmark the interest as directed. 032. Accordingly, ground number 1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 033. Ground no. 2 and 3 of the appeal with respect to not considering the sale of empty containers, etc. as profit industrial unit for the purpose of deduction under Section 80IB of the Act. 034. The brief facts shows

LANXESS INDIA P.LTD,THANE vs. ASST CIT CIR 1, THANE

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Lanxess India Private Limited, Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Lanxess House, Plot No. 162-164, Circle 1, Road No. 27, Wagle Estate, Opp. Iti Vs. 6Th Floor, Asher It Park, Road No. College, Midc, 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane-(West)-400604. Thane. Pan No. Aaccb 3880 A Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Lanxess India Private Limited, Circle 1, Lanxess House, Plot No. 162-164, 6Th Floor, Asher It Park, Road No. 16- Vs. Road No. 27, Wagle Estate, Opp. Iti Z, Wagle Industrial Estate, College, Midc, Thane. Thane-(West)-400604 Pan No. Aaccb 3880 A Appellant Respondent

3) read with 144C(13) of the Act dated 26 February 2014 are void-ab-initio, illegal and bad in law since the provisions of section initio, illegal and bad in law since the provisions of section initio, illegal and bad in law since the provisions of section 144C were applicable only from AY 144C were applicable only from

ACIT CIR 1, THANE vs. LANXESS INDIA P.LTD, THANE

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Lanxess India Private Limited, Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Lanxess House, Plot No. 162-164, Circle 1, Road No. 27, Wagle Estate, Opp. Iti Vs. 6Th Floor, Asher It Park, Road No. College, Midc, 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane-(West)-400604. Thane. Pan No. Aaccb 3880 A Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Lanxess India Private Limited, Circle 1, Lanxess House, Plot No. 162-164, 6Th Floor, Asher It Park, Road No. 16- Vs. Road No. 27, Wagle Estate, Opp. Iti Z, Wagle Industrial Estate, College, Midc, Thane. Thane-(West)-400604 Pan No. Aaccb 3880 A Appellant Respondent

3) read with 144C(13) of the Act dated 26 February 2014 are void-ab-initio, illegal and bad in law since the provisions of section initio, illegal and bad in law since the provisions of section initio, illegal and bad in law since the provisions of section 144C were applicable only from AY 144C were applicable only from

TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMAPANY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Transfer Pricing. After an international transaction is noticed subject to satisfaction of section 92B, a reference is made to the TPO under sub-Section (1) of Section 92CA of the Act. The TPO after considering the documents submitted by the assessee is to pass an order under Section 92CA (3) of the Act. As per Section 92CA (3A), the order

M/S. MERCATOR LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT 5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO by the asssessee are dismissed and the asseessee appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 7278/Mum/2017 (A.Y: 2010-11) & Co No. 21/Mum/2019 (2010-11) (Arising Out Of Ita No. 29/Mum/2018) Mercator Ltd Vs. Dcit 3Rd Floor, Mittal Tower- Range 5(2) B Wing, Nariman Point Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Mumbai- 400021. Road, Mumbai-400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacm5007A Appellant .. Respondent Dy. Cit Vs. Mercator Lines Ltd Range 5(2)(2), Rno.571 3Rd Floor, Mittal Tower- Aayakar Bhavan, Mk B Wing, Nariman Point Road, Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai - 400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacm5007A Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Mr.Nikhil Tiwari.Ar Revenue By : Mr.Krishnakumarmishra.Dr Date Of Hearing 30.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22.12.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: 29/Mum/2018 & Co No. 21/Mum/2019 M/S. Mercator Ltd, Mumbai. The Cross Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Cit(A))-57, Mumbai Passed U/S 250 Of The Act & The Assessee Has Filed The Cross Objection(Co) In The Revenue Appeal.

3) read with section 153 of the Act. 13. Undisputedly, sub-section (3A) to section 92CA has been inserted w.e.f. 01.06.2007 providing time limit for the Transfer Pricing

ACCENTURE SERVICES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri N.K. Pradhan

13 the Transfer Pricing Officer himself has allowed working capital adjustment to the assessee. That being the case, we direct the Assessing Officer/Transfer Pricing Officer to consider assessee’s claim of working capital adjustment while computing the margins of the comparables.” 34. In view of the aforesaid, we direct the Assessing Officer to consider assessee’s claim of working capital

FIRMENICH AROMATICS (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 9(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri G Manjunatha () & Shri Ravish Sood () Firmenich Aromatics (India) Vs Acit-9(3)(1), Mumbai Pvt Ltd, 9Th Floor, Arena Space, Cts 20, New Shyam Nagar Road, Behind Majas Bus Depot, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai. Pan : Aaacf1621M Appellant Respondednt

13, in the decision referred to above, the Tribunal has deleted the addition made on account of transfer pricing adjustment with the following observations:– “21. We have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record in the light of decisions relied upon. Though, the Transfer Pricing Officer has alleged that the assessee failed to furnish any evidence to substantiate