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

TP disallowances, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim for allowance of long term capita loss arisen on sale of shares of BSPL, which is wholly owned foreign subsidiary company of the assessee company of Rs.922,33,42,911/- and also for disallowance of depreciation of Rs.27.20 crores on the Coating Line Machine leased to the Bilcare Singapore

DCIT, SWARGATE PUNE vs. CUMMINS INDIA LTD , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

TP Adjustment\n12,70,86,646/-\nii\nAdd: Disallowances u/s.14A r.w.s.8D\n47,55,629/-\niii\nAdd: Denial of claim of deduction u/s.\n35(2AB)\n13,10,97,715/-\niv\nAdd: Denial of claim of deduction on\naccount of Education Cess Paid\n5,28,66,834/-\n2\nTotal Assessed Income\n31,58,06,824/-\n756,25,79,114/-\n6.\n13.1 Computation

CUMMINS INDIA LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

TP Adjustment\n12,70,86,646/-\nii\nAdd: Disallowances u/s.14A r.w.s.8D\n47,55,629/-\n\nill\n\nAdd: Denial of claim of deduction u/s.\n35(2AB)\n13,10,97,715/-\n\niv\nAdd: Denial of claim of deduction on\naccount of Education Cess Paid\n5,28,66,834/-\n\n2\nTotal Assessed Income\n31,58,06,824/-\n756

LIQUIDHUB ANALYTICS PVT. LTD. (NOW MERGED WITH CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LTD),PUNE vs. NFAC, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2020-21

disallowance of health and education cess are concerned, the DRP upheld the action of the AO / TPO. 6. Aggrieved with such order of the AO / TPO / DRP, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law; Legal Grounds 1. The impugned order

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE vs. PIAGGIO VEHICLES PRIVATE LIMITED, BARAMATI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for A

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

disallowed payment of Corporate Guarantee Fee (CGF). The findings of 3 ITA No. 867/PUN/2022 & ITA.No.589/PUN./2024 (M/s.Piaggio Vehicles Pvt. Ltd.) Ld. TPO vide its order dated 31/10/2018 were incorporated by the Ld.AO in his assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Act framed on 31/01/2019. Assessee did not challenged the draft order of Ld.AO before

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 4,, PUNE vs. M/S. PIAGGIO VEHICLES PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for A

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

disallowed payment of Corporate Guarantee Fee (CGF). The findings of 3 ITA No. 867/PUN/2022 & ITA.No.589/PUN./2024 (M/s.Piaggio Vehicles Pvt. Ltd.) Ld. TPO vide its order dated 31/10/2018 were incorporated by the Ld.AO in his assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Act framed on 31/01/2019. Assessee did not challenged the draft order of Ld.AO before

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

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

TP Risk Parameter)\n8. So far as issues relating to disallowance u/s.40A(7) of\nthe Act (Gratuity provision) and large expenditure by way of\npenalty or find assessee furnished submissions and after\nconsidering the same no adverse inference was drawn. Ld.\nAssessing Officer (AO) further observed that there are certain\ninternational transactions entered into by the assessee\nnamely 'Payment

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 JALNA, JALNA vs. VIKRAM TEA PROCESSOR PRIVATE LIMITED, JALNA

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2013-14

method and proposed an upward adjustment of Rs.4,73,46,877/-. We find the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer on the ground that clause (i) of section 92BA of the Act has been omitted by the Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f. 01.04.2017. The reasons given by the Ld. CIT(A) while deleting the addition have

INCOME TAX OFFICER , JALNA vs. VIKRAM TEA PROCESSOR PRIVATE LIMITED , JALNA

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2013-14

method and proposed an upward adjustment of Rs.4,73,46,877/-. We find the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer on the ground that clause (i) of section 92BA of the Act has been omitted by the Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f. 01.04.2017. The reasons given by the Ld. CIT(A) while deleting the addition have

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]

TP analysis for provision of services and availing of services. Prayer The Appellant prays that the regional/overseas comparable companies selected by the Appellant should be accepted and included in the set of comparable if the overseas branches of the Appellant are aggregated with the Indian location. 4 M/s.Persistent Systems Limited [A] The Appellant also prays that

PRECISION CAMSHAFTS LTD.,SOLAPUR vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT (NFAC), SOLAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1962/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Precision Camshafts Ltd., V Assessment Unit, Income Tax E-102/103, Akkalkot Road, S Department (National Midc, Solapur – 413006. Faceless Assessment Center), Maharashtra. Jurisdiction Details : Pne- C(1), Range 63, Circle-1, Solapur. Pan: Aabcp1086B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak – Ar Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 17/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/07/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(3) Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2020-21 Dated 25.07.2024, Emanating From Order Of Dispute Resolution Panel U/S.144C(5) Of The Act For A.Y.2020-21

disallowance under section 14A The appellant company craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the above grounds of appeal.” Submission of ld.AR : 2. Ld.AR for the Assessee submitted that the Assessee had shown corporate guarantee in the Transfer Pricing Study Report and Guarantee Commission was shown at NIL following other method. PCL, Netherland

DCIT, CIRCLE 8 PUNE, PUNE vs. ALFA LAVAL INDIA PVT LTD, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

disallowance of Liquidated\ndamages written back, addition of Rs.36,87,805/- on account of\ndisallowance of Project Provision Costs written back and of\nRs.2,94,96,845/- on account of Reversal of Provision for Doubtful Debts\nwithout appreciating the fact that the assessee was required to first credit\nthe written back liquidated damages / the Project Provision\ncosts/provisions for doubtful debts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE vs. M/S. FINOLEX CABLES LTD,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Hon. Vice-& Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.Dcit, Circle-8, Vs M/S. Finolex Cables Ltd., Pune. 26/27, Mumbai Pune Road, Pimpri, Pune. Pan: Aaacf 2637 D Appellant/Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By : Shrij.G. Pendse, Ar Revenue By : Shrim.M. Chate, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/05/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/05/2023 Order Perpartha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm: This Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Emanates From The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Pune, Dated 19.05.2022For A.Y.2013-14 As Per The Following Revised Grounds Of Appeal:- “1(A) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Allowing The Claim Of The Assessee U/S 80Ic On Income Earned From Sale Of Scrap Without Appreciating The Fact That Assesses Itself Categorized Income Earned From Sale Of Scrap As Other Income In The Profit & Loss Statement Of Roorkee Unit Undertaking & The Same Is Not Derived From The Activities Of The Eligible Business. 1(B) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld.Cit(A)Has Erred In Ignoring The Decision Of Hon'Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Liberty India Vs. Cit (2009) 317 Itr 218 (Sc) Wherein The Words "Derived From' Is Explained? 1(C) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Allowing The Claim Of The Assessee U/S 80Ic On Sale Of Scrap, Relying On The Decision Of The Hon'Ble Madras High Court In The Case Of M/S Fenner India Ltd. (241 Itr 803) Without Appreciating The Facts That The Same Has Been M/S. Finolex Cables Ltd.

TP adjustments. 4. First we would adjudicate the claim of the Revenue u/s. 80IC of the Act, which is in ground No.1 of the revised grounds of appeal. 4.1 During the relevant year, the assessee has claimed deduction u/s. 80IC for its LDC Division at Roorkee unit for an amount of Rs.1,18,08,92,057/- being

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

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

disallowance of\ndeduction claimed u/s.35(2AB) at Rs.56,49,66,955/- without appreciating\nthe fact that the total expenditure claimed in assessee's return of income\nu/s.35(2AB) and eligible expenditure mentioned in Form 3CL later issued\nby the DSIR has substantial difference and needs further verification.\n3.\nOn the facts and in the circumstances of the case