MERCEDES-BENZ INDIA PVT. LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DAIMLER CHRYSLER INDIA PVT. LTD),PUNE vs. ASST. CIT, CIRCLE-8, PUNE

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1083/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 Mercedes-Benz India Pvt. Ltd., (Formerly Known As Daimler Chrysler India Pvt. Ltd.) E-3, Midc Chakan, Phase – Iii, Chakan Industrial Area, Kuruli & Nighoje, Tal. Khed, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 410501 …. Pan: Aabcm1789L Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 8, Pune

TP study report. However, the TPO had not accepted application of TNNM method and had considered CUP method as most appropriate method to benchmark the transactions by comparing royalty payment made by assessee @ 3% with royalty payment made by Maruti Udyog Ltd. to Suzuki Motors Corporation, Japan @ 3%. The TPO thus, had made adjustment of ₹ 2.20 crores for the year

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

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

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

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. BMC SOFTWARE (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands partly allowed

method for the purpose of benchmarking the above international transactions with Profit Level Indicator (PLI) of Operating Profit/Operating Cost (OP/OC). In the TP study report, the respondent-assessee company adopted 3 years weighted average arithmetic mean of the comparables for the purpose of benchmarking the international transactions, which reads as under :- 4 Nature of international BMC India 3 year weighted

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

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 Representative for the assessee placed heavy reliance on the decision of Pune Bench of Tribunal in HOV Services Ltd. Vs. JCIT (2016) 73 taxmann.com

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

TATA TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 7,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2054/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Tata Technologies Limited, The Acit, Circle-7, Pune. Plot No.25, Phase I, Rajiv Vs Gandhi Infotech Park, Hinjawadi, Pune – 411057. Pan: Aaactg 3092 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Dhanesh Bafana & Smt.Chandni Shah – Ar Revenue By Shri Shivraj B. Moray - Dr Date Of Hearing 01/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 18/10/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle-7, Pune Dated 30.10.2019 For The A.Y. 2015-16 U/S 143(3)Rws 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act. The Appellant Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Ao, Following The Directions Of The Ld. Drp, Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Ld. Tpo In Rejecting The Alp Computation Undertaken By The Appellant For Benchmarking The International Transaction Pertaining To Payment Of Commission, Thereby Making A Tp Adjustment Of Rs.5,79,53,349 In The Software Distribution Segment.

methods for benchmarking the transaction and not providing any valid comparable uncontrolled transaction to determine the ALP. The Appellant prays that the TP analysis conducted by the Appellant ought to be accepted and consequently the TP adjustment ought to be deleted. Corporate Tax Grounds 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. MAGNA STEYR INDIA P. LTD.,, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

disallowed in AY 2010-11. 15. The AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 274 r.w. section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Each one of the above grounds of appeal is independent and without prejudice to other. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter or amend to the above grounds of appeal.” 4. Shri Vispi Patel with

MAGNA STEYR INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

disallowed in AY 2010-11. 15. The AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 274 r.w. section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Each one of the above grounds of appeal is independent and without prejudice to other. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter or amend to the above grounds of appeal.” 4. Shri Vispi Patel with

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

method, then the TP adjustment, if any, ought to be made with reference to the ultimate selling price at which the product is sold by the AEs to the third parties. 5. Ground No 5 On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A), with respect to the international transaction of import of finished

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

method, then the TP adjustment, if any, ought to be made with reference to the ultimate selling price at which the product is sold by the AEs to the third parties. 5. Ground No 5 On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A), with respect to the international transaction of import of finished

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

method, then the TP adjustment, if any, ought to be made with reference to the ultimate selling price at which the product is sold by the AEs to the third parties. 5. Ground No 5 On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A), with respect to the international transaction of import of finished

M/S. SAVA HEALTHCARE LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

TP proceedings had invoked provisions of section 6(3) of the Act, which was also incorrect and unsustainable in law. It was further submitted by assessee that the Assessing Officer had referred to the TPO only various international transactions as contained in Form 3CEB for benchmarking. However, the TPO had proceeded to test altogether different transactions of taxing profits

M/S. SAVA HEALTHCARE LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

TP proceedings had invoked provisions of section 6(3) of the Act, which was also incorrect and unsustainable in law. It was further submitted by assessee that the Assessing Officer had referred to the TPO only various international transactions as contained in Form 3CEB for benchmarking. However, the TPO had proceeded to test altogether different transactions of taxing profits

M/S. SAVA HEALTHCARE LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

TP proceedings had invoked provisions of section 6(3) of the Act, which was also incorrect and unsustainable in law. It was further submitted by assessee that the Assessing Officer had referred to the TPO only various international transactions as contained in Form 3CEB for benchmarking. However, the TPO had proceeded to test altogether different transactions of taxing profits

M/S. SAVA HEALTHCARE LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

TP proceedings had invoked provisions of section 6(3) of the Act, which was also incorrect and unsustainable in law. It was further submitted by assessee that the Assessing Officer had referred to the TPO only various international transactions as contained in Form 3CEB for benchmarking. However, the TPO had proceeded to test altogether different transactions of taxing profits