M/S. BILCARE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

method and suggested TP adjustment of Rs.88,479,495/-. Thus, the TPO vide order dated 31.10.2019 passed u/s 92CA(3) suggested a total TP adjustments of Rs.22,76,78,495/-. 7. On receipt of the TPO‟s order u/s 92CA(3), the Assessing Officer passed a draft assessment order dated 31.12.2019, wherein, the Assessing Officer had made an addition

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), PUNE vs. M/S. BILCARE LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

method and suggested TP adjustment of Rs.88,479,495/-. Thus, the TPO vide order dated 31.10.2019 passed u/s 92CA(3) suggested a total TP adjustments of Rs.22,76,78,495/-. 7. On receipt of the TPO‟s order u/s 92CA(3), the Assessing Officer passed a draft assessment order dated 31.12.2019, wherein, the Assessing Officer had made an addition

GRUPO ANTOLIN INDIA PVT. LTD., (ERSTWHILE KNOWN AS GRUPO ANTOLIN PUNE PRIVATE LIMITED),PUNE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(2),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.299/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09

method used for benchmarking was not correct when compared with the margins of comparables at 6.39%. We will deal with the next aspect of TP adjustment i.e. exclusion of comparables finally selected in the paras hereunder. 14. First, we will deal with the plea of assessee vis-à-vis extraordinary expenses during the year. In this regard, the learned Authorized

INTERVET INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(2),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2008-09 is

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.155/Pun/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

TP adjustment of Rs.1,01,73,320 be deleted. 6. Ground No. 6 On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in disallowing the provisions for slow moving and expired stocks of Rs.80,98,427/- The Appellant prays that provision for slow moving and expired stocks ought to be allowed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. INTERVET INDIA PVT. LTD.,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2008-09 is

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.155/Pun/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

TP adjustment of Rs.1,01,73,320 be deleted. 6. Ground No. 6 On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in disallowing the provisions for slow moving and expired stocks of Rs.80,98,427/- The Appellant prays that provision for slow moving and expired stocks ought to be allowed

INTERVET INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2008-09 is

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.155/Pun/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

TP adjustment of Rs.1,01,73,320 be deleted. 6. Ground No. 6 On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in disallowing the provisions for slow moving and expired stocks of Rs.80,98,427/- The Appellant prays that provision for slow moving and expired stocks ought to be allowed

TIETO IT SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.242/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Tieto It Services India Pvt. Ltd., 8Th Floor, D-Building, Weikfield It Citi Info Park, Nagar Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411014 …. Pan: Aaacf3424C Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 7, Pune

depreciation was based on hours and the financial cost on the basis of exchange gains and losses in the ratio of exports with associated enterprises and non associated enterprises. The TPO was of the view that where the assessee has not followed any scientific method for allocation of expenses, the same cannot be accepted. The first allocation of expenses

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. TIETO TELECOM R & D SERVICES PVT LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.242/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Tieto It Services India Pvt. Ltd., 8Th Floor, D-Building, Weikfield It Citi Info Park, Nagar Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411014 …. Pan: Aaacf3424C Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 7, Pune

depreciation was based on hours and the financial cost on the basis of exchange gains and losses in the ratio of exports with associated enterprises and non associated enterprises. The TPO was of the view that where the assessee has not followed any scientific method for allocation of expenses, the same cannot be accepted. The first allocation of expenses

M/S PERSISTENT SYSTEMS LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.692/Pun/2022 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S.Persistent Systems Assessment Unit, Income Limited, V Tax Department. “Bhageerath” 402, Senapati S Bapat Road, Pune – 411016. Pan: Aabcp 1209 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Dhanesh Bafna& Shriaditya Vaidya– Ar’S Revenue By Shri Suhas Kulkarni - Irs Addl Commissioner Of Income Tax Date Of Hearing 26/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02/11/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order, Dated 20.07.2022 Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “Ground 1: Order Is Invalid / Non Est  On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessment Unit (‘Au’) Has Erred In Passing The Draft Assessment M/S.Persistent Systems Limited [A]

Depreciation expenses originally absorbed by the appellant in its Segmental P&L as per TP Report. Ground 6: Non-acceptance/exclusion of overseas comparable companies On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the AU based on the directions of Ld. DRP has erred in notaccepting/excluding the overseas comparable companies operating in the regions where

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. MAN TRUCKS INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TP study report as well as in the proceedings before the TPO had benchmarked the import of raw material transactions with CUP method. However, before the DRP, it had submitted certain additional evidences vide letter dated 12.04.2013, whereby the assessee had changed the method from CUP to CPM. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue in this regard, pointed

M/S. MAN TRUCKS INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TP study report as well as in the proceedings before the TPO had benchmarked the import of raw material transactions with CUP method. However, before the DRP, it had submitted certain additional evidences vide letter dated 12.04.2013, whereby the assessee had changed the method from CUP to CPM. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue in this regard, pointed

E-GAIN COMMUNICATIONS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(2),, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2675/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 E-Gain Communications Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(2), Pune. Ltd., Office No.702, 7Th Floor, B-1, The Cerebrum It Park, Vadgaon Sheri, Kalyani Nagar, Pune- 411014. Pan : Aaacn9946R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Madhur Agarwal Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai : Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.06.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 13, Pune. [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 11.08.2017 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Briefly, The Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Company Incorporated Under The Provisions Of The Companies Act, 1956. It Is Wholly Owned Subsidiary Of Egain Communication

method, but rejected the TP study report submitted by the assessee company and proceeded to identify the different set of comparable entities for the purpose of determining the ALP of the international transactions. While doing so, the TPO applied the following filters :- S. No. Criteria (i) Only current years data (FY 2012-13) has been used. (ii) Companies with income

AUTOLINE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos. 970 & 2983/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Autoline Industries Limited. S. No.313-314 & 320-323, Nanewarwadi, Chakan, Pune-410501. Pan : Aabca4534D .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

method, the rate of TP adjustment works out to Rs.15.50%. 15. Before the Ld. DRP, again same set of detailed arguments were placed which are on record. The Ld. DRP observed that the international transactions undertaken by the assessee includes loans and advances given to its AE, Koderat Investment Ltd. The assessee has not charged interest on this by claiming

AUTOLINE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos. 970 & 2983/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Autoline Industries Limited. S. No.313-314 & 320-323, Nanewarwadi, Chakan, Pune-410501. Pan : Aabca4534D .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

method, the rate of TP adjustment works out to Rs.15.50%. 15. Before the Ld. DRP, again same set of detailed arguments were placed which are on record. The Ld. DRP observed that the international transactions undertaken by the assessee includes loans and advances given to its AE, Koderat Investment Ltd. The assessee has not charged interest on this by claiming

M/S. CARRARO INDIA PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

method for demonstrating that the international transaction was at ALP. The TPO noticed that the assessee entered into an Agreement dated 15-12-2008 w.e.f. 01-07-2008 with Carraro SpA, Italy, in terms of which a sum of Rs.75.41 lakh was paid as royalty @ 0.50% of sales. It was opined that there was no justification for making new additional

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE vs. M/S. CARRARO INDIA PVT.LTD,, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

method for demonstrating that the international transaction was at ALP. The TPO noticed that the assessee entered into an Agreement dated 15-12-2008 w.e.f. 01-07-2008 with Carraro SpA, Italy, in terms of which a sum of Rs.75.41 lakh was paid as royalty @ 0.50% of sales. It was opined that there was no justification for making new additional

SEMPERTRANS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,ROHA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, PANVEL

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly\nallowed for statistical purposes

Method inappropriately and further\nerred by not bringing on record any comparable data as mandated\nby section 92C of the Act read with Rule 10B and Rule 10C of the\nRules D\nFactual Grounds:\nOn the facts and circumstances of the case and in contrary to law,\nLd. TPO/Ld. AO pursuant to the directions issued by the Hon'ble\nDRP

GOODYEAR SOUTH ASIA TYRES PRIVATE LTD.,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, AURANGABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1068/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12

method selected by the Appellant ought to be accepted, and the TP adjustment made by the Ld. AO and confirmed by the Ld. DRP, without any (reference to comparable uncontrolled transaction ought to be deleted. Ground No.4 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. DRP and the Ld. AO, following