DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. BEKAERT INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.571/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Bekaert Industries Private Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Limited, Pune Plot No.127, Sr.No.232/1+2, Friends Co-Operative Hsg. Soc., New Airport Road, Behind Idbi, Sakore Nagar, Vimannagar, Pune – 411 014 Pan : Aaacb8571E Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.541/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs. Bekaert Industries Private Pune Limited, Plot No.B-1, Midc, Ranjangaon, Tal Shirur, Dist. Pune 419210 Pan : Aaacb8571E Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.976/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Bekaert Industries Private Limited, Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Plot No.127, Sr.No.232/1+2, Pune Friends Co-Operative Hsg. Soc., New Airport Road, Behind Idbi, Sakore Nagar, Vimannagar, Pune – 411 014 Pan : Aaacb8571E Appellant Respondent Shri T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy

addition of Rs.77,76,390/-, against which the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal. 13. The first issue raised by the ld. AR is that the suo moto transfer pricing adjustment offered by the assessee at Rs.38.00 lakh was ignored by the AO/TPO, who enhanced the income

BEKAERT INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.571/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Bekaert Industries Private Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Limited, Pune Plot No.127, Sr.No.232/1+2, Friends Co-Operative Hsg. Soc., New Airport Road, Behind Idbi, Sakore Nagar, Vimannagar, Pune – 411 014 Pan : Aaacb8571E Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.541/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs. Bekaert Industries Private Pune Limited, Plot No.B-1, Midc, Ranjangaon, Tal Shirur, Dist. Pune 419210 Pan : Aaacb8571E Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.976/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Bekaert Industries Private Limited, Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Plot No.127, Sr.No.232/1+2, Pune Friends Co-Operative Hsg. Soc., New Airport Road, Behind Idbi, Sakore Nagar, Vimannagar, Pune – 411 014 Pan : Aaacb8571E Appellant Respondent Shri T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy

addition of Rs.77,76,390/-, against which the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal. 13. The first issue raised by the ld. AR is that the suo moto transfer pricing adjustment offered by the assessee at Rs.38.00 lakh was ignored by the AO/TPO, who enhanced the income

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

In the result, the appeal for the A

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.738, 739 & 740/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

income of the assessee shall be increased by Rs.94,92,109/-. The draft order incorporating the transfer pricing adjustment of equal amount was notified by the TPO on 29.02.2016. The assessee assailed various facets of the transfer pricing addition

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

In the result, the appeal for the A

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.738, 739 & 740/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

income of the assessee shall be increased by Rs.94,92,109/-. The draft order incorporating the transfer pricing adjustment of equal amount was notified by the TPO on 29.02.2016. The assessee assailed various facets of the transfer pricing addition

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

In the result, the appeal for the A

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.738, 739 & 740/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

income of the assessee shall be increased by Rs.94,92,109/-. The draft order incorporating the transfer pricing adjustment of equal amount was notified by the TPO on 29.02.2016. The assessee assailed various facets of the transfer pricing addition

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE vs. HALLIBURTON TECHNOLOGY INDIA PVT. LTD, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Invoking Section 80La( 10) , Of The Act When Bare Reading Of The Provision Does Not Impose Such Burden Of Proving Tax Avoidance On A.O.? 3. Whether On The Facts, Circumstances Of The Case And- In Law, Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Was Justified In Interpreting The Words According To The Object Of The Provision Ignoring The Fundamental Principle Of Interpretation Of Stature That Nothing Should Be Added To The Words Used By Legislature? 4. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Imposing Burden Of Proving Tax Avoidance Ignoring The Fact That Section 80Ia(10) Of The Act Is A “Domestic Transfer Pricing” Provision & Proving Tax Avoidance Is Not One

income and it should be computed independent of transfer pricing regulations and transfer pricing orders. It is not therefore, permissible for the Assessing Officer to work out section 10A deduction on on the basis of arm‟s length price profit generated out of the orer of the Transfer Pricing Officer”. • Zavata India Private Limited [(TS-24-ITAT

DAR A1 HANDASAH CONSULTANTS (SHIR & PARTNERS) INDIA PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1 (2),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi

transfer pricing addition by the AO. If the computation of income is neither u/s.92C nor 92CA, namely, no transfer pricing

EATON TECHNOLOGIES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(2),, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.3075/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Eaton Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Cluster C, Wing 1, Eon Free Zone, Plot No.1, Sr. No.77, Midc Kharadi Knowledge Park, Kharadi ,Pune- 411 014. .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan : Aabce4323Q बनधम / V/S. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Dcit, Circle-1(2), Pune Assessee By : Shri Vishal Karla Revenue By : Shri S. P. Walimbe

addition. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO/DRP failed to appreciate that once the arm‘s length price in respect of the international transactions has be determined by the TPO under section 92CA(3) of the Act, and the prices charged by the Appellant have been found

EATON TECHNOLOGIES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-1,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & G.D.Padmahshaliआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.590/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Eaton Technologies Private Limited, Dcit, Circle-1(2), Cluster C, Wing 1, Eon Free Zone, Vs Pune Plot No.1, Sr.No.77, Midc Kharadi Knowledge Park, Kharadi, Pune 411 014 Pan : Aabce4323Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.902/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Eaton Technologies Private Limited, Pr.Cit-1, Cluster C, Wing 1, Eon Free Zone, Vs Pune Plot No.1, Sr.No.77, Midc Kharadi Knowledge Park, Kharadi, Pune 411 014 Pan : Aabce4323Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue

addition. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO failed to appreciate that once the' arm’s length price in respect of the international transactions has been determined, and the prices charged by the Appellant have been held to be at arm’s length, the provisions of section 10AA(9) read with section

EATON TECHNOLOGIES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(2),, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & G.D.Padmahshaliआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.590/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Eaton Technologies Private Limited, Dcit, Circle-1(2), Cluster C, Wing 1, Eon Free Zone, Vs Pune Plot No.1, Sr.No.77, Midc Kharadi Knowledge Park, Kharadi, Pune 411 014 Pan : Aabce4323Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.902/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Eaton Technologies Private Limited, Pr.Cit-1, Cluster C, Wing 1, Eon Free Zone, Vs Pune Plot No.1, Sr.No.77, Midc Kharadi Knowledge Park, Kharadi, Pune 411 014 Pan : Aabce4323Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue

addition. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO failed to appreciate that once the' arm’s length price in respect of the international transactions has been determined, and the prices charged by the Appellant have been held to be at arm’s length, the provisions of section 10AA(9) read with section

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

additions made to the total income of the Appellant on account of transfer pricing and corporate tax adjustment which is due to difference

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIR 1(1), PUNE vs. EATON TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita Nos.42 & 43/Pun/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 16-17 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Pune. M/S.Eaton Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Vs Cluster C Wing-1, Eon Zone, Midc Kharadi, Knowledge Park, Plot No.1, Survey No.77, Kharadi, Pune – 411014. Pan: Aabce 4323 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Vishal Kalra & Shri Ss Tomar -Ar Revenue By Shri Sunil Kumar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: These Revenue’S Twin Appeals For The Assessment Years 2015- 16 & 2016-17 Arise Against The Cit(A)-13, Pune’S Separate Orders; Both Dated 29.05.2020, Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-13/Dcit, Circle-1(2), Pune/10142/2019-20/02, Pn/Cit(A)-13/Dcit, Circle- 1(2), Pune/10142/2019-20/03 Respectively, Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Heard Both The Parties. Case Files Perused.

addition was made under the transfer pricing provisions. Further, the assessee had claimed deduction under section 10A of the Act in respect of the Engineering Design and Development Services provided to its Associated Enterprises which was allowed by the Assessing Officer. The Commissioner was of the view was that because of the high operating profit margin on total cost

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIR 1(1), PUNE vs. EATON TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita Nos.42 & 43/Pun/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 16-17 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Pune. M/S.Eaton Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Vs Cluster C Wing-1, Eon Zone, Midc Kharadi, Knowledge Park, Plot No.1, Survey No.77, Kharadi, Pune – 411014. Pan: Aabce 4323 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Vishal Kalra & Shri Ss Tomar -Ar Revenue By Shri Sunil Kumar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: These Revenue’S Twin Appeals For The Assessment Years 2015- 16 & 2016-17 Arise Against The Cit(A)-13, Pune’S Separate Orders; Both Dated 29.05.2020, Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-13/Dcit, Circle-1(2), Pune/10142/2019-20/02, Pn/Cit(A)-13/Dcit, Circle- 1(2), Pune/10142/2019-20/03 Respectively, Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Heard Both The Parties. Case Files Perused.

addition was made under the transfer pricing provisions. Further, the assessee had claimed deduction under section 10A of the Act in respect of the Engineering Design and Development Services provided to its Associated Enterprises which was allowed by the Assessing Officer. The Commissioner was of the view was that because of the high operating profit margin on total cost

DY. COMM. OF INCOME-TAX, CIRLCE-1,, NASHIK vs. M/S. SIDHIVINAYAK ASSOCIATES,, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and cross objections raised by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 1350/Pun/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

price to land owners and service charged to mediators, on the ground they have not accrued. Therefore, it is prayed to allow the deduction of the said expenditures. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance of Rs.10,00,760/-, being the cost for out of court settlement of dispute with land owner, on the ground

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. PERSISTENT SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2336/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle – 4, Pune …. Vs. Persistent Systems Pvt. Ltd., Bhageerath, 402, Senapati Bapat Marg, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Pune – 411016 Pan: Aabcp1209Q

transfer pricing report has shown 'Ordinary profit' to be of 13.84% (as observed by the AO in the assessment order) as against the net profit margin of 26.40% shown by the assessee. 2. On the facts and circumstance of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of disallowance made u/s 14A of the Income

REHAU POLYMERS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE

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

Income Tax Rules, CUP method\nis a method, wherein the price charged or paid for property transferred or services\nprovided in a comparable uncontrolled transaction is identified. Thereafter, the\nsaid price is adjusted to account for differences, if any and the said price is taken to\nbe the Arm's Length Price. Thus, as per the said rule, for applying

ASSITANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. MERCEDES BENZ INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above and all appeals of Revenue and Cross Objection of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

income of the Appellant of Rs.22,18,12,968 on account of transfer pricing adjustments by not considering the transfer pricing analysis documented in transfer pricing report for AY 2009-10. 5 CO No.24/PUN/2014 & Ors The Appellant prays that the addition

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. MERCEDES - BENZ INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above and all appeals of Revenue and Cross Objection of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

income of the Appellant of Rs.22,18,12,968 on account of transfer pricing adjustments by not considering the transfer pricing analysis documented in transfer pricing report for AY 2009-10. 5 CO No.24/PUN/2014 & Ors The Appellant prays that the addition