ACIT CC -6(1), MUMBAI, BKC, MUMBAI vs. GNP CONSULTANCY AND SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., THANE

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

69C of the Act - Rs. 4,49,32,144/- (iii) Disallowance u/s. 37(1) - Rs. 15,75,000/- 4. The CIT(A) on further appeals gave partial relief to the assessee. Both the assessee and the Revenue are in appeal before the Tribunal Against the order of the CIT(A). The grounds raised by the Revenue and the assessee

ACIT CC 6(1), MUMBAI, BKC, MUMBAI vs. GNP CUNSULTANCY AND SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., THANE

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

69C of the Act - Rs. 4,49,32,144/- (iii) Disallowance u/s. 37(1) - Rs. 15,75,000/- 4. The CIT(A) on further appeals gave partial relief to the assessee. Both the assessee and the Revenue are in appeal before the Tribunal Against the order of the CIT(A). The grounds raised by the Revenue and the assessee

GNP CONSULTANCY AND SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 6(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

69C of the Act - Rs. 4,49,32,144/- (iii) Disallowance u/s. 37(1) - Rs. 15,75,000/- 4. The CIT(A) on further appeals gave partial relief to the assessee. Both the assessee and the Revenue are in appeal before the Tribunal Against the order of the CIT(A). The grounds raised by the Revenue and the assessee

L & T TECHNOLOGY SERVICES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blel & T Technology Services Limited V. Acit – Circle – 2(2)(1) L & T House, N.M. Marg Room No. 545, 5Th Floor Mumbai - 400001 Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaccl4310P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Nitesh Joshi Department Represented By : Shri Manoj Kumar

TRANSFER PRICING ISSUES 2. The Assessing Officer erred in adding the premia income on forward contracts to the total income of the Appellant without appreciating the fact that the premia income had already been offered to tax in the earlier years. 3. Without prejudice to Ground No.2, the Assessing Officer erred in adding an amount of Rs.49

EXECUTIVE TRADING CO. PVT LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. COMM OF INCOME TAX (A), NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

69C of the Act chargeable to tax at the rate of 60% in terms of Section 115BBE of the Act. Being aggrieved, the Appellant preferred appeal before the CIT(A) 5. challenging the Assessment Order, dated 29/09/2021, passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Act on the ground of lack of jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings

ACIT-CC-3.1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. I AHMED & CO.(COLD STORAGE & EXPORTS0 PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed in\nrespect of purchases from M/s S

price or\naccommodation element, if any.\n10. In the present case, the AO has estimated 12.5% without any\ncomparative GP analysis or industry data. Such flat rate appears arbitrary.\nAt the same time, complete deletion by the Ld. CIT(A) may not be justified\nin view of survey findings and deficiencies pointed out.\n11. Considering the totality of facts, including

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), MUMBAI vs. BHISMA AGRO FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result ITA number 2376/M/2023 filed by the learned AO for assessment year 2021 – 22 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

transfers made and the expenses incurred in cash in relation to Bhisma Agro food products private limited and Unicot food products private limited. xi. Documents shows that the cash receipts are generated from an unaccounted sale made by the assessee and Unicote Food products private limited to the extent of ₹ 20,290,325/- for assessment year

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S BHISMA AGRO FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD, DELHI

In the result ITA number 2376/M/2023 filed by the learned AO for assessment year 2021 – 22 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

transfers made and the expenses incurred in cash in relation to Bhisma Agro food products private limited and Unicot food products private limited. xi. Documents shows that the cash receipts are generated from an unaccounted sale made by the assessee and Unicote Food products private limited to the extent of ₹ 20,290,325/- for assessment year

BHISHMA AGRO FOOD PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result ITA number 2376/M/2023 filed by the learned AO for assessment year 2021 – 22 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

transfers made and the expenses incurred in cash in relation to Bhisma Agro food products private limited and Unicot food products private limited. xi. Documents shows that the cash receipts are generated from an unaccounted sale made by the assessee and Unicote Food products private limited to the extent of ₹ 20,290,325/- for assessment year

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S BHISMA AGRO FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result ITA number 2376/M/2023 filed by the learned AO for assessment year 2021 – 22 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

transfers made and the expenses incurred in cash in relation to Bhisma Agro food products private limited and Unicot food products private limited. xi. Documents shows that the cash receipts are generated from an unaccounted sale made by the assessee and Unicote Food products private limited to the extent of ₹ 20,290,325/- for assessment year

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S BHISMA AGRO FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD, DELHI

In the result ITA number 2376/M/2023 filed by the learned AO for assessment year 2021 – 22 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

transfers made and the expenses incurred in cash in relation to Bhisma Agro food products private limited and Unicot food products private limited. xi. Documents shows that the cash receipts are generated from an unaccounted sale made by the assessee and Unicote Food products private limited to the extent of ₹ 20,290,325/- for assessment year

ACIT-CENTREL CIRCLE-3-1, MUMBAI vs. I AHMED & CO.(COLD STORAGE & EXPORTS) PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed in respect of purchases from M/s S

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadishassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21 & Assessment Year: 2021-22 & Assessment Year: 2022-23 & Assessment Year: 2023-24

price or accommodation element, if any. 10. In the present case, the AO has estimated 12.5% without any comparative GP analysis or industry data. Such flat rate appears arbitrary. At the same time, complete deletion by the Ld. CIT(A) may not be justified in view of survey findings and deficiencies pointed out. 11. Considering the totality of facts, including

ACIT-CC-3.1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. I AHMED & CO (COLD STORAGE& EXPORTS) PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed in respect of purchases from M/s S

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadishassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21 & Assessment Year: 2021-22 & Assessment Year: 2022-23 & Assessment Year: 2023-24

price or accommodation element, if any. 10. In the present case, the AO has estimated 12.5% without any comparative GP analysis or industry data. Such flat rate appears arbitrary. At the same time, complete deletion by the Ld. CIT(A) may not be justified in view of survey findings and deficiencies pointed out. 11. Considering the totality of facts, including

ACIT-CC-3(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. I AHMED & CO( COLD STORAGE & EXPORTS) PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed in respect of purchases from M/s S

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadishassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21 & Assessment Year: 2021-22 & Assessment Year: 2022-23 & Assessment Year: 2023-24

price or accommodation element, if any. 10. In the present case, the AO has estimated 12.5% without any comparative GP analysis or industry data. Such flat rate appears arbitrary. At the same time, complete deletion by the Ld. CIT(A) may not be justified in view of survey findings and deficiencies pointed out. 11. Considering the totality of facts, including

ACIT- CC -3.1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. I AHMED & CO.(COLD STORAGE & EXPORTS) PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed in respect of purchases from M/s S

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadishassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21 & Assessment Year: 2021-22 & Assessment Year: 2022-23 & Assessment Year: 2023-24

price or accommodation element, if any. 10. In the present case, the AO has estimated 12.5% without any comparative GP analysis or industry data. Such flat rate appears arbitrary. At the same time, complete deletion by the Ld. CIT(A) may not be justified in view of survey findings and deficiencies pointed out. 11. Considering the totality of facts, including

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-3.1, MUMBAI vs. I AHMED & CO. (COLD STORAGE & EXPORTS) PVT. LTD, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed in respect of purchases from M/s S

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadishassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21 & Assessment Year: 2021-22 & Assessment Year: 2022-23 & Assessment Year: 2023-24

price or accommodation element, if any. 10. In the present case, the AO has estimated 12.5% without any comparative GP analysis or industry data. Such flat rate appears arbitrary. At the same time, complete deletion by the Ld. CIT(A) may not be justified in view of survey findings and deficiencies pointed out. 11. Considering the totality of facts, including

M/S CELIO FUTURE FASHION PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ADDL/JT/CIT/DY/ASSTT/ITO/NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) under section 920 of the Act by applying external Transaction Net Margin Method (TNMM). 1.1. Ld. DRP/AO has erred in rejecting Retail Sales Price (RPM) method adopted by the Appellant as the most appropriate method for justifying ALP and ignored the fact that the appellant is engaged in trading and distribution activities without any value addition

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S VIRAJ PROFILES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) noted that the assessee had not charged any commission for extending such guarantees. He was of the opinion that the transaction was an international transaction that required benchmarking, and accordingly determined the arm’s length commission at 1.5%. assessee’s income for the respective years. 6. In the first appellate stage, the learned CIT(A) examined