AQUATECH SYSTEMS (ASIA) PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

144C(3) of the Act on 19-03-2013 making addition on account of transfer pricing adjustment Rs.5,92,560/- and disallowance of warranty provision Rs.41,22,637/-. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealing particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income in respect of above mentioned additions / disallowances. Thereafter

LEAR AUTOMOTIVE INDIA PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 9,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote. आयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.1951/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 Lear Automotive India Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner E-25, 26 & 27, Bhosari Midc, Vs Of Income Tax, Circle-9, Pune – 411026. Pune. Pan: Aaacl 1978 K Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Dhanesh Bafna & Chandani Shah – Ar(S) Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 20/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 04/11/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-6, Pune, Dated 01.11.2018 For The A.Y. 2007-08 Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(In Short “The Act”). The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Erroneous Levy Of Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 6 (‘The Ld. Cit(A)’) Erred In Upholding The Action Of Ld. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Tax, Circle - 9 (‘The Ld.Ao’) Of Levying Penalty, Being 100% Of Tax On The Addition To Returned Income Amounting To Inr 38,37,270, Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Act. Rs.38,37,270/-. 2. Penalty Proceedings Under Section 271(1)(C) Are Invalid On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld. Ao For

u/s 271(1)(c) ought to be deleted.” 2. At the outset, the ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee submitted that the notice under section 271(1)(c) issued by the AO is defective as the Assessing Officer(AO) has failed to specify whether the notice has been issued for filing inaccurate particulars of income or for concealment of income

SKODA AUTO [ I ] P.LTD,AURANGABAD vs. ACIT, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2] The appellant company submits that the learned Assessing Officer erred in issuing the notice of demand notice u/s. 156 and penalty notice u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271(1

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. EAST WEST SEEDS LTD.,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

section 144C(1) of the IT Act 1961 which specifically mandates the AO to pass draft assessment order “in the first instance" in which the AO by mistake appended the notice of demand u/s 156 and penalty notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271

DCIT, SWARGATE PUNE vs. HONEYWELL AUTOMATION INDIA LIMITED, PUNE

Bench: Hon’Ble Smt Astha Chandra & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

144C(13) of the Act was passed whereby four additions were made viz; (1) disallowance of management service fees (TP adjustment) for sum of 16,97,34,348/- (2) denial of tax exemption claimed u/s 10A(7) & 10AA(9) of the Act for sum of 53,64,06,922/-, (3) addition of interest on refund received

YAZAKI (I) P LIMITED,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS TATA YAZAKI AUTOCOMP LTD),PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-7, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.163/Pun/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

271(1)(c) of the Act along with the said draft assessment order, thereby not following the mandate as laid down under section 144C of the Act. The Appellant prays that the said draft assessment order be held as void-ab-initio, bad in law and illegal and consequently the entire assessment ought to be quashed.” 3. Having gone through

VANDERLANDE INDUSTRIES B.V. PUNE,PUNE vs. ADIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-II, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

penalty notice under the Act without following the due procedure contemplated u/s. 144C of the Act, if that is the case, let us examine the provisions contemplated u/s. 144C of the Act. 9. The marginal head note of provisions of section 144C reads as reference to Dispute Resolution Panel. Sub-section (1) of section 144C provides the AO shall

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. MAGIC SOFTWARE ENTERPRISES INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

u/s 92C(4) which are deemed to represent the concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars. 9. For these and such other reasons as may be urged at the time of hearing, the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may be vacated and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 10. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. MAGIC SOFTWARE ENTERPRISES INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

u/s 92C(4) which are deemed to represent the concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars. 9. For these and such other reasons as may be urged at the time of hearing, the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may be vacated and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 10. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter

DY. CIT, CIRCLE-8, PUNE vs. ATLAS COPCO (INDIA) LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the Cross objections are partly allowed in so far

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.649/Pun/2013 & 1726/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-8, Atlas Copco (India) Limited, Pune Vs. Sveanagar, Dapodi, Pune – 411 012 Pan : Aaaca4074D (Appellant) (Respondent)

271(1)(c) of the Act, again, on 29-12-2012, whose copy has also been placed on record. Thereafter, the AO 6 Atlas Copco (India) Limited A.Yrs. 2008-09 and 2009-10 passed the final assessment order dated 27-02-2012 u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Act determining total income at Rs.156.73 crore. 8. From the above factual

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. ATLAS COPCO (INDIA) LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the Cross objections are partly allowed in so far

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.649/Pun/2013 & 1726/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-8, Atlas Copco (India) Limited, Pune Vs. Sveanagar, Dapodi, Pune – 411 012 Pan : Aaaca4074D (Appellant) (Respondent)

271(1)(c) of the Act, again, on 29-12-2012, whose copy has also been placed on record. Thereafter, the AO 6 Atlas Copco (India) Limited A.Yrs. 2008-09 and 2009-10 passed the final assessment order dated 27-02-2012 u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Act determining total income at Rs.156.73 crore. 8. From the above factual

IMERYS NEWQUEST (INDIA) P. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 590/Pun/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11

u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C (13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2 A.Y. 2010-11 2. The brief facts of the case as emanating from records are: The assessee-company is a joint venture of Imerys Group and Ballarpur Industries Group for manufacturing of Wet Ground Calcium Carbonate (WGCC), a chemical used

LEAR AUTOMOTIVE INDIA P. LTD. ,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-8, PUNE, PUNE

penalty proceedings u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of\nthe Act is pre-mature.\n17.\nIn the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.\nOrder pronounced in the open court on 10th October, 2025.\nSd/-\n(R.K. Panda)\nVICE PRESIDENT\nSd/-\n(Astha Chandra)\nJUDICIAL MEMBER\nपुणे / Pune; दिनांक / Dated : 10th October, 2025.\nरवि\nआदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित / Copy

MSC SOFTWARE CORPORATION INDIA P.LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2009-10. 2 ITA No. 379/PUN/2014, A.Y. 2009-10 2. The brief facts of the case as emanating from records are : The assessee company is a subsidiary of MSC Software Corporation, USA. The assessee is providing software development services

KIMBERLY CLARK LEVER P.LTD.,PUNE vs. ACIT, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2481/Pun/2012 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Kimberly Clark Lever P. Ltd., Gat No.934 To 937, Village Sanaswadi Off Nagar Road, Ta- Shirur, Pune-412208. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaack4647E बनाम / V/S. Acit, Circle-Xi(I), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri Percy Pardiwalla Revenue By : Shri Sandeep Garg सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 22.02.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Final Assessment Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Short) Of The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Pune (‘The Assessing Officer’ For Short) Dated 29.10.2012 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “The Appellant Objects To The Order Dated 29 October 2012 Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144(C) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 11(1), Pune [‘Acit’ Or ‘Ao’] Following The Directions Issued By The Dispute Resolution Panel (‘Drp’) In Respect Of The Aforesaid Assessment Year On The Following Among Other Grounds:

u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short) of the Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Pune (‘the Assessing Officer’ for short) dated 29.10.2012 for the assessment year 2008-09. 2. The appellant raised the following grounds of appeal :- “The appellant objects to the order dated 29 October 2012 passed under

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1) , PUNE vs. FIAT INDIA AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

144C(1) of the IT Act. Since according to the calculation of the Assessing Officer, the assessee has no brought forward loss the assessee company reduced business loss of Rs.139 crores from business profits as per clause 3 of Explanation below section 115JB(2) of the IT Act. 3. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer passed

M/S. FIAT INDIA AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

144C(1) of the IT Act. Since according to the calculation of the Assessing Officer, the assessee has no brought forward loss the assessee company reduced business loss of Rs.139 crores from business profits as per clause 3 of Explanation below section 115JB(2) of the IT Act. 3. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer passed

BMC SOFTWARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

The appeal is dismissed as not pressed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

144C(13) read with section 144B of the Act. 12. Non-consideration of adjustment for differences on account of functional and risk profile of comparable companies vis-a-vis the Appellant Erred in comparing full-fledged risk bearing entities with the Appellant's captive operations without making any risk adjustment for differences between the functional and risk profile of comparable

TIBCO SOFTWARE B.V.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (IT), CIRCLE - 2,, PUNE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Sonjoy Sarma,Jm Assessment Year : 2014-15 Tibco Software B.V. ...... Appellant C/O Tibco Software India P.Ltd. 3 Floor, Binnarius,Deepak Complex, National Games Road, Shastri Nagar, Yerwada, Pune – 411 006. Pan : Aaect3252G V/S. Dcit(It),Circle-2, Pune ……Respondent

u/s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (Act) for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. The Appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal “Ground No.1: On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Hon„ble DRP erred in directing the Ld. AO to tax the receipt Rs.9