M/S SANOFI INDIA LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT RG 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

price (ALP, hereafter) of export commission paid to the overseas associated enterprises (AE). 3. Briefly the facts are, the assessee is a subsidiary of Aventis Pharma Holding GmbH, which, in turn, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Hoechst AGTE. As stated by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO, in short), assessee is primarily engaged in manufacture and marketing of formulations across

ACIT- 3(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. MM/S SANOFI INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD)., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

price (ALP, hereafter) of export commission paid to the overseas associated enterprises (AE). 3. Briefly the facts are, the assessee is a subsidiary of Aventis Pharma Holding GmbH, which, in turn, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Hoechst AGTE. As stated by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO, in short), assessee is primarily engaged in manufacture and marketing of formulations across

PROCTER & GAMBLE HYGINE & HEALTH CARE LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

801B of the Act is available for 100% of the profits from Vaporub-10 gm Unit. Accordingly, Ground No. III raised by the Assessee is dismissed. 10 M/s. Procter & Gamble Hygiene and Health Care Limited 7. In the course of hearing, we had asked the ld. Counsel to demonstrate that common machinery which is used in the new Vicks unit

ACIT, MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the cross-objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Reliance Industries Ltd., Room No. 559, 5Th Floor, 3Rd Floor Maker Chamber Iv, Aayakar Bhavan, New Marine Vs. Nariman Point, S.O. Lines, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacr 5055 K Appellant Respondent

transfer pricing officer ("TPO") in his order u/s. 92CA(3) 5. Assessment of lower book profit by Computation of Income 3.07 not reducing principal portion of lease rent Excess Deduction u/s 10AA in respect of Jamnagar Refinery 7.0 The first issue is regarding excess deduction allowed u/s 10AA of the Act by treating the year under consideration as 5th year

ADDL CIT RG 7(1), MUMBAI vs. PROCTOR & GAMBLE HYGIENE & HEALTHCARE LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

10,006/- of unutilized MODVAT credit. The same is deleted. Thus ground no. 5 is allowed.‖ 15.4. Being aggrieved the Revenue is now in appeal before us against the above relief granted by the Assessing Officer. 15.5. Both the side agreed that the Tribunal has decided identical issue in the following appeals: - 1994-95 ITA No. 859/Mum/2003 Dated 30/06/2009

PROCTER & GAMGLE HYGIENE& HEALTHCARE ,LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 7(1), MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

10,006/- of unutilized MODVAT credit. The same is deleted. Thus ground no. 5 is allowed.‖ 15.4. Being aggrieved the Revenue is now in appeal before us against the above relief granted by the Assessing Officer. 15.5. Both the side agreed that the Tribunal has decided identical issue in the following appeals: - 1994-95 ITA No. 859/Mum/2003 Dated 30/06/2009

DCIT(CC)-2(4), MUMBAI., MUMBAI vs. MACLEODS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

transfer pricing adjustment made for specified domestic transactions (SDT) pursuant to clause(i) of section 92BA which was omitted by Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f. 01.04.2017 which the ld. CIT(A) held to be applicable retrospectively by placing reliance on the decision in case of PCIT vs. Texport Overseas Pvt. Ltd. by Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka [2020]114 taxman.com568

DCIT(CC)-2(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MACLEODS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

transfer pricing adjustment made for specified domestic transactions (SDT) pursuant to clause(i) of section 92BA which was omitted by Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f. 01.04.2017 which the ld. CIT(A) held to be applicable retrospectively by placing reliance on the decision in case of PCIT vs. Texport Overseas Pvt. Ltd. by Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka [2020]114 taxman.com568

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CC)-2(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MACLEODS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

transfer pricing adjustment made for specified domestic transactions (SDT) pursuant to clause(i) of section 92BA which was omitted by Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f. 01.04.2017 which the ld. CIT(A) held to be applicable retrospectively by placing reliance on the decision in case of PCIT vs. Texport Overseas Pvt. Ltd. by Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka [2020]114 taxman.com568

DCIT(CC)-2(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MACLEODS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

transfer pricing adjustment made for specified domestic transactions (SDT) pursuant to clause(i) of section 92BA which was omitted by Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f. 01.04.2017 which the ld. CIT(A) held to be applicable retrospectively by placing reliance on the decision in case of PCIT vs. Texport Overseas Pvt. Ltd. by Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka [2020]114 taxman.com568

M/S. ZENSAR TECHNOLOGIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT -2(3), 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. Zensor Technologies Ltd V. Acit-2(3) Magnet House, 2Nd Floor Mumbai Narottam Morarjee Marg Ballard Estate, Mumbai- 400038 Pan: Aaacf0742K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit- 2(3) V. M/S. Zensor Technologies Ltd Room No. 555, Aayakar Bhavan Magnet House, 2Nd Floor Mumbai Narottam Morarjee Marg Ballard Estate, Mumbai- 400038 Pan: Aaacf0742K (Appellant) (Respondent)

10. Under Clause (1) of Explanation (baa), ninety per cent of any receipts by way of brokerage, commission interest, rent, charges or any other receipt of a similar nature included in any such profits are to be deducted from the profits of the business as computed under the head "Profits and Gains of Business or Profession". The expression "included

THE DY CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. VODAFONE WEST LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

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

transferring the prepaid coupons or starter kits\nto the distributors and thus section 194H is not applicable on trade discounts\ngiven to prepaid distributors. We find that similar findings have also been\nrendered recently by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in Vodafone\nDigilink Ltd. (supra), vide order dated 14.10.2024. Therefore, respectfully\nfollowing the decisions cited supra, the disallowance

VODAFONE WEST LIMITED,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR GUJARAT LIMITED),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

transferring the prepaid coupons or starter kits\nto the distributors and thus section 194H is not applicable on trade discounts\ngiven to prepaid distributors. We find that similar findings have also been\nrendered recently by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in Vodafone\nDigilink Ltd. (supra), vide order dated 14.10.2024. Therefore, respectfully\nfollowing the decisions cited supra, the disallowance

ASST CIT CC 38, MUMBAI vs. UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

801B. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in directing the AO not to consider the amount of excise duty and sales tax totaling to Rs.37,83,51,575/- as a part of total turnover for the purpose of deduction u/s. 80HHC. 6. On the facts

M/S. UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD(NOW KNOWN AS UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD),MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT CEN CIR-38, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

801B. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in directing the AO not to consider the amount of excise duty and sales tax totaling to Rs.37,83,51,575/- as a part of total turnover for the purpose of deduction u/s. 80HHC. 6. On the facts

THE ACIT CC-38, MUMBAI vs. M/S. UNITED PHOSPHOROUS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

801B. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in directing the AO not to consider the amount of excise duty and sales tax totaling to Rs.37,83,51,575/- as a part of total turnover for the purpose of deduction u/s. 80HHC. 6. On the facts

UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CEN RG IX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

801B. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in directing the AO not to consider the amount of excise duty and sales tax totaling to Rs.37,83,51,575/- as a part of total turnover for the purpose of deduction u/s. 80HHC. 6. On the facts

ADDL CIT CEN RG IX, MUMBAI vs. UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD ( FORMLERY KNOWN AS UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

801B. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in directing the AO not to consider the amount of excise duty and sales tax totaling to Rs.37,83,51,575/- as a part of total turnover for the purpose of deduction u/s. 80HHC. 6. On the facts