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 adjustment of ₹1,66,99,302/-. 072. Income of the assessee was assessed under Section 143(3) of the Act vide

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 adjustment of ₹1,66,99,302/-. 072. Income of the assessee was assessed under Section 143(3) of the Act vide

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 adjustment of ₹1,66,99,302/-. 072. Income of the assessee was assessed under Section 143(3) of the Act vide

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 adjustment of ₹1,66,99,302/-. 072. Income of the assessee was assessed under Section 143(3) of the Act vide

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 adjustment of ₹1,66,99,302/-. 072. Income of the assessee was assessed under Section 143(3) of the Act vide

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 adjustment of ₹1,66,99,302/-. 072. Income of the assessee was assessed under Section 143(3) of the Act vide

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 adjustment of ₹1,66,99,302/-. 072. Income of the assessee was assessed under Section 143(3) of the Act vide

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 adjustment of ₹1,66,99,302/-. 072. Income of the assessee was assessed under Section 143(3) of the Act vide

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

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

1), Mumbai Assesseeby : Shri Dhanesh Bafnaa/w Ms. Hirali Desai Revenue by : Shri Jayant Kumar Date of Hearing – 26.04.2018 Date of Order – 23.07.2018 O R D E R PER SAKTIJITDEY, J.M. Aforesaid appeal by the assessee is directed against the assessment order dated 31st January 2017, passed under section 143(3) r/w section 144C(13) of the Income

NAVNIDHI STEEL AND ENGG CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 5(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2007-08

transferred to some other account. (iv) It means that Bhanwarlal Jain Group companies are providing only accommodation entries and no genuine transactions. In the light of the above facts, the Ld. Assessing Officer treated the amount of Rs.25 lakhs taken as loans/advances as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. 2.2. On appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of Income

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

1), Mumbai Assessee by : Shri P.J. Pardiwallaa/w Shri Nishant Thakkar Revenue by : Shri Saurabh Deshpande Date of Hearing – 25.04.2018 Date of Order – 20.07.2018 O R D E R PER SAKTIJITDEY, J.M. The aforesaid appeal by the assessee is directed against assessment order dated 29th October 2010, passed under section 143(3) r/w 144C of the Income

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

143(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

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

143(3) 2 ITA 6081/Mum/2018 r.w.s. 144C(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and it pertains to AY 2014-15. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “Each of the grounds and/ or sub-grounds of the appeal are independent and without prejudice to the other: 1. Ground No. 1 — Transfer Pricing (*TP') adjustment in relation

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

143(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

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

143(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

VODAFONE INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 8(3)(2), MUMBAI

143(3) read with Section 144C(1) of the Act incorporating the above transfer pricing adjustment. In addition the Assessing

DOW CHEMICALS INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA-14(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the

143(2) and section 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the\nassessee. During the assessment proceedings, from the perusal of the profit\nand loss account filed by the assessee for the year under consideration, it\nwas observed that the assessee has claimed depreciation of\nRs.27,76,60,023 (Rs.16,80,16,789 @25% on goodwill value

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

143(3) r/w section 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") pursuant to the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel–I (DRP), Mumbai, pertaining to the assessment years 2009–10 and 2010–11. ITA no.1671/Mum./2014 Assessee’s Appeal – A.Y. 2009–10 2. Shri P.J. Pardiwala, learned Sr. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset