LINTAS INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 3(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed with the same directions

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Acit Cir 3(2)(1) Lintas India Private Limited It Office, R.No. 608, 6 Th 15Th Floor, Express Towers, Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Nariman Point, Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacl0124F Lintas India Private Addl/Joint/Deputy/Acit/Income- Limited 15Th Floor, Express Tax Officer, National Faceless Vs. Towers, Nariman Point, Appeal Centre, Delhi Mumbai-400 021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacl0124F Assessee By : Shri Ajit Jain & Siddhesh Chaugule Revenue By : Dr. Yogesh Kamat, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 09/12/2022

Section 144B of the income tax act for assessment year 2017 – 18. On 3/2/2022. ITA No.398/MUM/2019 & 595/MUM/2022 Lintas India Private Limited.;A.Y. 2014-15,2017-18 033. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: – “General 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case aid in law, the learned Transfer Pricing

LINTAS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. NFAC, DELHI , DELHI

The appeal is allowed with the same directions

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Acit Cir 3(2)(1) Lintas India Private Limited It Office, R.No. 608, 6 Th 15Th Floor, Express Towers, Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Nariman Point, Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacl0124F Lintas India Private Addl/Joint/Deputy/Acit/Income- Limited 15Th Floor, Express Tax Officer, National Faceless Vs. Towers, Nariman Point, Appeal Centre, Delhi Mumbai-400 021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacl0124F Assessee By : Shri Ajit Jain & Siddhesh Chaugule Revenue By : Dr. Yogesh Kamat, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 09/12/2022

Section 144B of the income tax act for assessment year 2017 – 18. On 3/2/2022. ITA No.398/MUM/2019 & 595/MUM/2022 Lintas India Private Limited.;A.Y. 2014-15,2017-18 033. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: – “General 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case aid in law, the learned Transfer Pricing

SPICA ELASTICA PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Spica Elastica Pvt. Ltd National Faceless Assessment 477, Chandra Chowk Seth Centre Mooljee Jaitha Cloth Market, Vs. Shaik Memon Street, Kalbadevi, Delhi Mumbai-400 002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacs6153K Assessee By : Shri Bhavin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Samuel Pitta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.09.2022 O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, Am:

Section 144B of The Income Tax Act (The Act) dated 9/3/2022 for Assessment Year 2017 – 18 raising several grounds of appeal. However, only grievance of the assessee is that the National faceless assessment Centre has made transfer pricing

JOHNSON &JOHNSON P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT/ACIT/JT/ITO/NFAC, DELHI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

transfer pricing order, the ld AO should not have passed the draft assessment order. Thus provision of section 144C does not apply to the assessee. Thus, the time limit for completion of the assessment reverts back to 21 Months from the end of the assessment year. Therefore, as held by the co-ordinate Bench in ATOS India Private Limited (supra

ACIT (LTU)-1, MUMBAI vs. JOHNSON & JOHNSON PVT. LTD.(FRMERLY KNOWN AS JOHNSON & JOHNSON LTD.), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

transfer pricing order, the ld AO should not have passed the draft assessment order. Thus provision of section 144C does not apply to the assessee. Thus, the time limit for completion of the assessment reverts back to 21 Months from the end of the assessment year. Therefore, as held by the co-ordinate Bench in ATOS India Private Limited (supra

JOHNSON & JOHNSON PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - LTU-1, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

transfer pricing order, the ld AO should not have passed the draft assessment order. Thus provision of section 144C does not apply to the assessee. Thus, the time limit for completion of the assessment reverts back to 21 Months from the end of the assessment year. Therefore, as held by the co-ordinate Bench in ATOS India Private Limited (supra

SHELL INDIA MARKETS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(4), MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER\n&\nMS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

section 144B, sustaining the transfer pricing\nadjustments as well as the disallowance under section\n40(a)(ia).\n6. Aggrieved, the assessee

M/S. LAXMI ORGANIC INDUSTRIES LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(2)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 144C(8), does not extend to picking up and making an enhancement of income in respect of an item in respect of which no variation is proposed in the impugned assessment order, and in the impugned assessment order. the "variation" proposed is with respect to Arm's length price for the sale of electricity only: (f) erred in being

M/S. NATUREX INDIA PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. NFAC, DELHI DCIT-CIR 2(3) (1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Naturex India Pvt. Ltd. 502, 5Th Floor, Akruti Centre Point, Midc Central Road, Andheri (East), Chakala Midc S.O. Mumbai-400093 Pan: Aabcv0883A ..... Appellant Vs. Nfac, Delhi/Dcit Cir. 2(3) (1) Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai- 400 020 ..... Respondent

transfer price of the Appellant in respect of the payment of management service fee of INR 3, 01, 42,197/- to Associated Enterprises ('AEs'), holding that this international transaction does not satisfy the arm's length principle envisaged under the Act and in specific in doing so grossly erred in: 2.1 Disregarding the evidence placed on record by labelling them

DCIT -5(2) (1) , MUMBAI vs. KEC INTERNATIONAL LTD, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No. 3.1 & 3.2 raised by the Assessee are dismissed

section 144B of the Act. 1.2. The Appellant prays that the draft assessment order be held as bad in law and consequently, the assessment proceedings and the final assessment order be quashed. 2. Transfer pricing

APM TERMINALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.1 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed, holding that the assessment order passed by the learned Assessing Officer is barred by limitation and hence quashed

Bench: Shri. Prashant Maharishi, Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailsandeep Singh Karhail

section 144B of the Income Tax Act (the A Act (the Act) dated 31/7/2022 by the assessment 2022 by the assessment unit, determining the total income of the assessee at determining the total income of the assessee at determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.11,64,10,372/ 10,372/– making transfer pricing

FIRST CREDIT ITES P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL/JT.DY/CIT/ITO, NATIONAL E -ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am First Credit Ites P. Ltd. The Addl. Commissioner Of D-211, Ghatkopar Indl. Estate, Income-Tax Officer Behind R-City Mall, National E-Assessment Off L.B.S Marg, Vs. Centre, Ghatkopar West, Delhi-110003 Mumbai-400 086 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No.Aabcf5210B Assessee By : Shri Sunil Moti Lala, Ar Revenue By : Shri Tejinder Pal Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.05.2022

section 144B of the income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) passed by National e- Assessment Centre (the learned Assessing Officer) dated 21st April, 2021 determining the total income of the assessee at ₹2,64,40,219/- against the return of income filed at ₹43,16,570/- on 30th September, 2016, whereby the adjustment proposed by the learned Transfer Pricing

OMNI ACTIVE HEALTH TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ADDL/JT/DY/ASST/CIT/ITO/NFAC, DELHI

transfer pricing adjustment of INR 16,59,51,699/- which incorporated in the Draft Assessment Order dated 22/04/2021, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B

OMNIACTIVE HEALTH TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 8(2)(1), AAYAKAR BHAWAN, MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

section 144B of the Income tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") in pursuance to the directions dated 18 June 2024 issued by the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel ('DRP") u/s 144C(5) of the Act, for the aforesaid assessment year on the grounds set out herein; 3 Omniactive Health Technologies Limited 1:0 Transfer Pricing

UPS EXPRESS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY C/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Renu Jauhri ()

144B of the Act beyond the time limit as specified under Section 153 of the Act. The Appellant submits that the assessment order being barred by limitation is without jurisdiction and void ab initio and hence, the same is liable to be quashed 3. Ground No. 3-Transfer Pricing

GOLDMAN SACHS (INDIA) SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

transfer pricing adjustments proposed by the TPO. In conformity with the directions issued by the learned DRP under section 144C(5) of the Act, the AO passed the final assessment order dated 24.10.2004 under section 143(3) r.w.s.144C(13) r.w.s.144B of the Act, assessing the total income of the assessee at ₹ 408,92,21,980/-. Being aggrieved, the assessee

KBS CREATION LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DY COMM. OF INCOME TAX -CIRCLE 24(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the concise ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

transfer pricing provisions prescribed procedure for arriving at arm’s length price in a systematic manner in the Act. The TPO has rigorously applied various filters as applicable. There cannot be exceptions on application of filters as to industry class or to any specific assessee. The DRP justified turn over filter, export turnover filter, RPT filter by referring various case

EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES (INDIA) PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-2(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailedwards Lifesciences (India) Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor Commerz – Ii, International Business Park Oberoi Garden City, Goregaon (East), Off Western Express Highway Goregaon (East), ............... Appellant Mumbai - 400063 Pan : Aaacb4203F V/S Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), ……………… Respondent Kautilya Bhawan, Bkc, Mumbai - 400012 Assessee By : Ms. Chandni Shah Ms. Riddhi Maru Ms. Kinjal Patel Revenue By : Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr.Dr

144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) pursuant to the directions issued by the learned Dispute Resolution Panel (“learned DRP”) under section 144C(5) of the Act, for the assessment year 2021-22. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: - 2 “Grounds pertaining to Transfer Pricing

WNS GLOBAL SERVICES P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL/JT/DY/ASSTT/CIT/ITO, NATIONA FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE,, DILHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalwns Global Services Pvt. Ltd., Pl 10, Gate No.4, Godrej & Boyce Complex, Pirojshanagar, Lbs Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400079. Pan: Aaacw2598L ...... Appellant Vs.. Addl./Jt/Dy./Acit/Ito/Nfac, Room No. 455, Circle-14(3)(1), Mumbai. ..... Respondent Appellant/Assessee By : Sh. Porus Kaka, Sr. Adv. & Sh. Manish Kant Respondent/Revenue By : Sh. Jasdeep Singh, Cit-Dr

Transfer Pricing Grounds Grounds challenging disallowance of depreciation claimed on intangible assets 18. On the fact and in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO has erred in disallowing depreciation of Rs 14.50,931 on intangible assets acquired by the Appellant from WNS Global Services (UK) Limited contending that the business rights acquired by the Appellant