M/S. TRIPLE POINT TECHNOLOGY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of assessee in assessment year 2011-12 is allowed, appeal of Revenue in assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed and the appeal of assessee in assessment year 2012-13 is partly al...

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.581/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Triple Point Technology (India) Pvt. Ltd., Building No.3, Commerzone, Survey No.144/145, Samrat Ashok Path, Airport Road, Yerwada, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411006 …. Pan:Aabct8184A Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 7, Pune

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act. ITA Nos.581 & 628/PUN/2016 3 2. We proceed to decide the present appeals by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. First, we shall take up cross appeals filed by assessee and Revenue. 4. The assessee in ITA No.581/PUN/2016, relating to assessment year 2011-12 has raised the following grounds

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. TRIPLE POINT TECHNLOGY INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of assessee in assessment year 2011-12 is allowed, appeal of Revenue in assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed and the appeal of assessee in assessment year 2012-13 is partly al...

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.581/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Triple Point Technology (India) Pvt. Ltd., Building No.3, Commerzone, Survey No.144/145, Samrat Ashok Path, Airport Road, Yerwada, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411006 …. Pan:Aabct8184A Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 7, Pune

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act. ITA Nos.581 & 628/PUN/2016 3 2. We proceed to decide the present appeals by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. First, we shall take up cross appeals filed by assessee and Revenue. 4. The assessee in ITA No.581/PUN/2016, relating to assessment year 2011-12 has raised the following grounds

M/S. TRIPLE POOINT TECHNOLOGY (INDIA) P.LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee in assessment year 2011-12 is allowed, appeal of Revenue in assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed and the appeal of assessee in assessment year 2012-13 is partly al...

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.581/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Triple Point Technology (India) Pvt. Ltd., Building No.3, Commerzone, Survey No.144/145, Samrat Ashok Path, Airport Road, Yerwada, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411006 …. Pan:Aabct8184A Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 7, Pune

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act. ITA Nos.581 & 628/PUN/2016 3 2. We proceed to decide the present appeals by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. First, we shall take up cross appeals filed by assessee and Revenue. 4. The assessee in ITA No.581/PUN/2016, relating to assessment year 2011-12 has raised the following grounds

GOODYEAR SOUTH ASIA TYRES PRIVATE LIMITED,,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

transfer pricing adjustment made on account of payment of Regional Service Charges (RSC). The assessee was engaged in the manufacturing of tyres. In the TP study report, the assessee had aggregated most of the international transactions and applied TNMM method. The transactions relating to sale of machinery and 12 payment of technical and license fees were benchmarked using CUP method

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

transfer pricing adjustment made on account of payment of Regional Service Charges (RSC). The assessee was engaged in the manufacturing of tyres. In the TP study report, the assessee had aggregated most of the international transactions and applied TNMM method. The transactions relating to sale of machinery and 12 payment of technical and license fees were benchmarked using CUP method

BILCARE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2720/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

163 (Delhi – Trib) upheld of power of DRP to make addition even in respect of items which is not subject matter of variations proposed by the Assessing Officer by holding as under : “10. It is clear from the mandate of sub-section (8) that the DRP is empowered, inter alia, to enhance the variations proposed in the draft order

TETRA PAK INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee for assessment year

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

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) accepted TNMM applied by assessee in respect of substantial international transactions entered into by the assessee. However, in respect of small portion of packaging material segment, the TPO held CUP to be most appropriate method. The TPO thus, made following upward adjustment. Trading Segment Packaging Material Traded Rs.3,96,69,788/-. Import of Straws Rs.3

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. M/S. TETRA PAK INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee for assessment year

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

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) accepted TNMM applied by assessee in respect of substantial international transactions entered into by the assessee. However, in respect of small portion of packaging material segment, the TPO held CUP to be most appropriate method. The TPO thus, made following upward adjustment. Trading Segment Packaging Material Traded Rs.3,96,69,788/-. Import of Straws Rs.3

TETRA PAK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee for assessment year

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

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) accepted TNMM applied by assessee in respect of substantial international transactions entered into by the assessee. However, in respect of small portion of packaging material segment, the TPO held CUP to be most appropriate method. The TPO thus, made following upward adjustment. Trading Segment Packaging Material Traded Rs.3,96,69,788/-. Import of Straws Rs.3

SONAL SANDEEP SATAV,PUNE vs. PCIT, PUNE-2, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

Transfer Pricing Officer for determination of arm's length price in respect of international transactions reported for the relevant assessment year. Then paragraph 4, along with its sub paragraphs 4.1 to 47 deal with disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) in the context of commission exceeding Re. 18.00 crore paid by the Assessee during the relevant assessment year, even though

M.M. PATEL PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,SOLAPUR vs. PCIT- CENTRAL, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

transferring the jurisdiction of the person, the transferee Income-\ntax Authorities as mentioned in section 116 of the Act shall exercise all\nthe powers and perform the functions as stipulated in the Act in respect\nof all the proceedings which may be commenced after the date of such\norder in respect of any year and such power includes passing

FAURECIA INDIA PVT.LTD,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS FAURECIA INTERIOR SYSTEMS INDIA PVT.LTD),,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -9,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

transfer pricing analysis and found following companies as comparables which are as under : Sr. Name of the Comparables PLI (OP/OC) % Turnover No. Rs. in Crore 1 Eclerx Services Ltd. 70.26 729.14 2 ICRA Techno Analytics Ltd. 49.35 27.68 3 Tata Elxsi Ltd. (Software 31.39 682.7 Development & Services Seg.) 4 Pentamedia Graphics Ltd. 15.31 4.94 6. The assessee was show caused

AMDOCS DEVELOPMENT CENTRE INDIA P. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1455/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08

section 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2. The cross appeals filed by the assessee and the Revenue were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “Ground 1 On the facts and circumstances

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. AMDOCS DEVELOPMENT CENTRE INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1455/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08

section 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2. The cross appeals filed by the assessee and the Revenue were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “Ground 1 On the facts and circumstances

REXEL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

163 taxmann.com 40 (Mumbai-Trib)\n(ii) Dow Chemical International (P.) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of\nIncome Tax [2024] 169 taxmann.com 290 (Mumbai-Trib.)\n(iii) Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-1 Vs. Eltek SGS (P.) Ltd.\n[2023] 153 taxmann.com 263 (Delhi)\n)iv) S&P Capital IQ (India) (P.) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of\nIncome

JOHN DEERE EQIPMENT P. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

transfers to Deere & Co, no right, title or interest in the software, the documentation, or any copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret or other intellectual property or proprietary right in the software or the documentation. It is specifically provided that ‘Dakota’ retains sole and exclusive title to all portions of software and documentation and any copies thereof. 62. Now, coming

JOHN DEERE INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

transfers to Deere & Co, no right, title or interest in the software, the documentation, or any copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret or other intellectual property or proprietary right in the software or the documentation. It is specifically provided that ‘Dakota’ retains sole and exclusive title to all portions of software and documentation and any copies thereof. 62. Now, coming

JOHN DEERE INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

transfers to Deere & Co, no right, title or interest in the software, the documentation, or any copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret or other intellectual property or proprietary right in the software or the documentation. It is specifically provided that ‘Dakota’ retains sole and exclusive title to all portions of software and documentation and any copies thereof. 62. Now, coming

JOHN DEERE EQIPMENT P. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.905 & 906/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-08 & 2008-09

transfers to Deere & Co, no right, title or interest in the software, the documentation, or any copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret or other intellectual property or proprietary right in the software or the documentation. It is specifically provided that ‘Dakota’ retains sole and exclusive title to all portions of software and documentation and any copies thereof. 62. Now, coming