ASST CIT 1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. AJE INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the ground of appeal of the Revenue and cross

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2012-13

transfer pricing adjustment. The cross-objectors contend that on the facts and in the objectors contend that on the facts and in the objectors contend that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) ought not to have circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) ought not to have

DIMEXON DIAMONDS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CENT. CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI

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

251.\n2. Erred in proposing transfer pricing adjustment of INR 88,71,465 to the\nincome of the Appellant.\nTransfer pricing provisions not applicable in absence of \"income\"\n3. Erred in making a transfer pricing adjustment in respect of the\ntransaction of discharge of purchase consideration by the Appellant\npursuant to a scheme of merger approved by the National Company

LARSEN & TOUBRO INFOTECH LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 2(2), MUMBAI

transfer is planned followed by scoping of work that needs to be done onsite as it requires proximity to customer and the work that can be offshored. Second, there is a need of certain technical staff to be onsite for better understanding of customer's ongoing requirements and translating the same to the offshore team for cost effective and timely

JUNGHEINRICH LIFT TRUCK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-CIRCLE 15(1)(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm Jungheinrich Lift Truck India Asst. Commissioner Of Income Private Limited 203 204, 2 N D Floor Tax Vs. Delphi A Wing, Central Avenue, Circle 15(2)(2) Hiranandani Business Park, Powai, Mumbai Mumbai-400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccj7808G

transfer pricing study reports are also at variance, accordingly he made an adjustment of ₹ 3,251,464/– determining the arm's-length price of the same at Rs. Nil. Accordingly, order under section

DCIT (LTU) 2, MUMBAI vs. ASIAN PAINTS LTD, MUMBAI

transfer pricing adjustment on account of the letter of comfort.\nIn view of our findings rendered in assessee's appeal on a similar issue,\nground no.1 raised in Revenue's appeal is dismissed.\n30. The issue arising in ground no.2, raised in Revenue's appeal, pertains to\nallowability of expenditure under section 35(2AB) of the Act.\n31. The brief

EDELWEISS ASSET MANAGEMENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

price on the date of exercise in respect of shares offered to employees under the ESOP scheme. The assessee further submitted that the difference is taxed as perquisite in the hands of employees on which tax is deducted. The assessee therefore, submitted that the expenditure on ESOP is eligible for deduction under section 37(1) of the Act. The assessee

LARSEN & TOUBRO LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 2(2), MUMBAI

Transfer pricing addition of INR 4,11,67,000/- (viii) Disallowance of deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act to the extent of INR 1,82,45,413/- [INR 3,94,71,017/- Less INR 2,12,25,604/-] (ix) Disallowance of deduction under Section 80HHE of the Act to the extent

JUNGHEINRICH LIFT TRUCK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE- DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanvs. Assessment Jungheinrich Lift Truck Unit/Nfac/Dcit India Private Limited Circle 15(1)(2), 4Th Floor, Delphi A Wing, Mumbai Central Avenue, Aayakar Bhavan, Hiranandani, Business Mumbai. Park, Powai, Mumbai, Maharashtra-400 076 Pan/Gir No. Aaccj7808G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajit Jain / Shri Siddesh Chaugule / Shri Rishab Parekh, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Kiran Unavekar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm: This Appeal Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 26.06.2024 Passed By Assessment Unit (Hereinafter Referred As Ld. Ao) For Ay 2020-21 In Pursuance To The Direction Of Ld. Drp-1, Mumbai Dated 14.06.2024

transfer pricing study reports are also at variance, accordingly he made an adjustment of ₹ 3,251,464/– determining the arm's-length price of the same at Rs. Nil. Accordingly, order under section

ASIAN PAINTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT LTU, MUMBAI

transfer pricing adjustment on account of the letter of comfort.\nIn view of our findings rendered in assessee's appeal on a similar issue,\nground no.1 raised in Revenue's appeal is dismissed.\n38. The issue arising in grounds no.2, 10, 11, and 12, raised in Revenue's\nappeal, pertains to allowability of expenditure under section

DCIT (LTU) 2, MUMBAI vs. ASIAN PAINTS LTD, MUMBAI

transfer pricing adjustment on account of the letter of comfort.\nIn view of our findings rendered in assessee's appeal on a similar issue,\nground no.1 raised in Revenue's appeal is dismissed.\n38. The issue arising in grounds no.2, 10, 11, and 12, raised in Revenue's\nappeal, pertains to allowability of expenditure under section

DCIT 14(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. TPG CAPITAL INDIA P. LTD, MUMBAI

Transfer Pricing Officer\nrejected this company as a comparable, however, while deciding assessee's\nappeal in ITA no.7594/Mum./2014, dated 8th February 2017, the Tribunal\naccepted it as a comparable. Pertinently, in case of TPG Growth Advisors India\nPvt. Ltd., which subsequently became the present assessee, for the very same\n assessment year th4e Tribunal in ITA no.5411/Mum./2016, dated

GOLDMAN SACHS (INDIA) SECURITIES PVT.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 7 (1) (1) , MUMBAI

transfer pricing documentation:\n• Sundaram Business Services Limited\n• ACE Software Exports Limited\n• Allsec Technologies Ltd\n• Crystal Hues Limited\n• Suprawin Technologies Limited\n• Cosmic Global Limited\n• Ultramarine & Pigments Limited (Segmental)\n• Datamatics Financial Services Limited\nd) Rejecting R Systems International Limited (BPO Segment) merely on\naccount of different financial year (FY);\ne) Rejecting Allsec Technologies

TPG CAPITAL P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 14(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 3132/Mum/2019is allowedand appeal of the revenue bearing ITA 3283/Mum/2019 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjeetpg Capital India Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 1004, The Capital, Plot No.C-70, Income-Tax, Circle-14(3)(1), Mumbai Room O.475, 4Th Floor, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Pan :Aabcn6660K Mumbai-400 020 Dcit-14(3)(1), Mumbai Vs Tpg Capital India Private Limited 1004, The Capital, Plot No.C-70, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 Pan :Aabcn6660K

transfer pricing documentation prepared by the Appellant required under the Act and the Rules, despite the same being functionally comparable to the functions of the Appellant herein. 6. The CIT(A) / AO /TPO erred in disregarding the ruling of the Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal in Appellant’s own case *ITA No.7954/Mum/2014+ for AY 2009- 10 and [ITA No.5411/Mum/2016

NGA HR (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

251/- under section 115JB of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny and the statutory notices were duly served on the assessee. Since the assessee had international transactions with its Associated Enterprises (AE) a reference was made to the Transfer Pricing

ASIAN PAINTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (LTU) 2, MUMBAI

transfer pricing adjustment on account of the letter of comfort.\nIn view of our findings rendered in assessee's appeal on a similar issue,\nground no.1 raised in Revenue's appeal is dismissed.\n30. The issue arising in ground no.2, raised in Revenue's appeal, pertains to\nallowability of expenditure under section 35(2AB) of the Act.\n31. The brief

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE RETAIL LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, whereas the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

Transfer Pricing Officer (‘TPO’) has passed the order on 27 January 2022 after due consideration of the limitation period of 31 March 2022 as prescribed under section 92CA(3A) r.w.s. 153 of the Act. Without prejudice to the above Grounds, Grounds of appeal in respect of the additions made by the learned AO are as under: Allowability of deduction under

TRANSPORTER INDUSTRY INTERNATINAL GMBH,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1240/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2016-17) Transporter Industry बिधम/ Dcit, Int Tax Circle- International Gmbh. 4(1)(2) Vs. Kalisrabe 57, 74076 Air India Building, Heilbronn, Germany, Pin- Nariman Point, Mumbai- 999999. 400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aafct0013Q (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Nikil Tiwari Revenue By: Shri Soumedu Kumar Dash (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ao/Dcit, Circle-4(1)(2), Mumbai R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Dated 25.04.2021 Pursuant To The Direction Of The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) Dated 18.03.2021. 2. Ground No. 1 Is General In Nature, So Dismissed. 3. Ground No. 3 Is A Legal Issue Which Has Been Raised By The Assessee Challenging The Action Of The Transfer Pricing Officer (Tpo) To Have Passed The Transfer Pricing (Tp) Order, After The Due Date Prescribed In Section 92(3A) R.W.S 153 Of The Act. Therefore, The Assessee Is Challenging The Action Of The Tpo In Passing Transfer Pricing Order After Limitation Period By Citing The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Madras High Court (Db) In The Case Of M/S. Saint Gobain

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) by not adopting any of the methods prescribed under Section 92C of the Act. The method to determine the ALP adopted was not one of the prescribed methods for computing the ALP. It was not even any method prescribed by the Board. At the relevant time, i.e. for A.Y. 2008-09 Section

ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) Ahura Centre, ‘B’ Wing 2Nd Floor Room No. 902, 9Th Floor Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited Room No. 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, ‘B’ Wing 2Nd Floor Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

251 CTR 290 dealing with the issue relating to availability of deduction under section 80-IA post change in shareholding pattern of the company, held as under: Page No. | 12 ITA NO. 465 & 931/MUM/2020 (A.Y: 2015-16) UltraTech Cement Limited “13. Insofar as the objection of the revenue that there had been change in the name of pattern of shareholding