DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX vs. VENTURA (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1788/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Ventura (India) Pvt. Ltd., Wing C, Marisoft, Kalyani Nagar Annex, Vadgaon Sheri, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411014 …. Pan: Aabce3274C Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 7, Pune

transfer pricing proceeding is that the contours of an un-controlled transaction shall reflect a measure of arm's length price of the tested international transaction. The un-controlled transaction, if it reflects a loss, would not normally be excludible unless any peculiarity in such un-controlled transaction is brought out. For instance, the un-controlled transaction

YAZAKI INDIA P LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS YAZAKI (I) LTD.,),PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.621/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

prices for the products less Material and components, less packing and warehouse charges, taxes and duties to the extent set forth on the invoice. A copy of the assessee’s Profit and loss account has been placed at page 197 of the paper book, which shows amount of Sales for the year under consideration at Rs.225.29 crore. There are Material

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLHAPUR vs. UNDERCARRIAGE AND TRACTOR PARTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

prices. 8 Salary & 9,577,349 As per Agreement and Commission paid to the extent permissible 5,611,968 under section 197 of the companies Act. Total 5026697530 2.4 Later on the case got assigned to JCIT (TP)-2, Pune on 30.07.2018. Due to change in the incumbency, the new TPO issued a fresh notice of opportunity u/s 92CA

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. JAIN IRRIGATION SYSTEM LTD.,, JALGAON

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.739/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd., Plastic Park, Post Box No.72, N.H. No.6, Bambhori, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Jalgaon – 425001 …. Pan: Aaacj7163Q Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Range-1, Jalgaon

197 TTJ 875 (Pune). 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. In the facts of present case, the assessee had reported certain international transactions in its return of income. The Assessing Officer thus, made reference under section 92CA(1) of the Act to the Transfer Pricing

JAIN IRRIGATION SYSTEMS LTD.,,JALGAON vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.739/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd., Plastic Park, Post Box No.72, N.H. No.6, Bambhori, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Jalgaon – 425001 …. Pan: Aaacj7163Q Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Range-1, Jalgaon

197 TTJ 875 (Pune). 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. In the facts of present case, the assessee had reported certain international transactions in its return of income. The Assessing Officer thus, made reference under section 92CA(1) of the Act to the Transfer Pricing

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

transfer pricing provisions. The Ld. AR stressed that whether wholly and completely the control was in India was the ‘status’ of assessee, which could be under section 6 of the Act and not by the TPO under the TP provisions. He pointed out that the TPO has time and again referred to the evidences collected by investigation wing and also

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

transfer pricing provisions. The Ld. AR stressed that whether wholly and completely the control was in India was the ‘status’ of assessee, which could be under section 6 of the Act and not by the TPO under the TP provisions. He pointed out that the TPO has time and again referred to the evidences collected by investigation wing and also

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

transfer pricing provisions. The Ld. AR stressed that whether wholly and completely the control was in India was the ‘status’ of assessee, which could be under section 6 of the Act and not by the TPO under the TP provisions. He pointed out that the TPO has time and again referred to the evidences collected by investigation wing and also

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

transfer pricing provisions. The Ld. AR stressed that whether wholly and completely the control was in India was the ‘status’ of assessee, which could be under section 6 of the Act and not by the TPO under the TP provisions. He pointed out that the TPO has time and again referred to the evidences collected by investigation wing and also

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

transfer pricing provisions. The Ld. AR stressed that whether wholly and completely the control was in India was the ‘status’ of assessee, which could be under section 6 of the Act and not by the TPO under the TP provisions. He pointed out that the TPO has time and again referred to the evidences collected by investigation wing and also

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

transfer pricing provisions. The Ld. AR stressed that whether wholly and completely the control was in India was the ‘status’ of assessee, which could be under section 6 of the Act and not by the TPO under the TP provisions. He pointed out that the TPO has time and again referred to the evidences collected by investigation wing and also

TRUMPF (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 7(5), PUNE

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.442/Pun/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11

197 (Bom.). 8. Now comes the question as to whether ICC International Agencies Ltd. is really not comparable so as to qualify for exclusion? The TPO accepted the segmental financials of the company which are germane to the functional profile of the assessee in the international transaction under consideration. This fact is not disputed by the ld. AR as well

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

section 259 of the Companies Act of Singapore. The Hon‟ble High Court of Republic Singapore was pleased to grant the permission vide order dated 02.10.2015. Subsequently, the assessee company transferred the shares of 79,33,50,000 ordinary shares of BSPL held by the assessee company for total consideration of Singapore Dollar 1 to Bilcare Packaging Ltd., which

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

section 259 of the Companies Act of Singapore. The Hon‟ble High Court of Republic Singapore was pleased to grant the permission vide order dated 02.10.2015. Subsequently, the assessee company transferred the shares of 79,33,50,000 ordinary shares of BSPL held by the assessee company for total consideration of Singapore Dollar 1 to Bilcare Packaging Ltd., which

ROBERTSHAW CONTROLS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PUNE

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

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

197, Viman Nagar, Nagar Road, Pune – 411014 PAN : AACCF3590M ......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 5, Pune ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Nikhil S. Pathak Revenue by : Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 01-11-2021 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 27-01-2022 आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

OPTIVA INDIA TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 3,, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

section 270A of the Act for under reporting of income. Prayer The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, supplement, amend, vary, withdraw, or otherwise modify the ground mentioned herein above at or before the time of hearing. All the aforesaid grounds of appeal are independent, in the alternative and without prejudice to one another. 2. The brief facts

SANGEETA BASAVRAJ MANGRULE,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, AURANGABAD

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

197/- and sold for Rs.22,77,943/-. The AO on verification of the credentials of PIL and other attending circumstances observed that PIL was included in the list of penny stock companies in enquiries conducted by BSE and SEBI, whose prices were manipulated. The Id. AR was requested to place on record the balance sheet of PIL for verifying

SMT. ASHA NARAYAN SHEWALE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11 (2),, PUNE

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed for

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1105/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05

197, SadesatraNali, Pune Hadapsar, Pune 411 028 PAN : BDBPS1726C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Abhay A. Avchat Respondent by Smt. Vranda U. Matkari Date of hearing 05-02-2020 Date of pronouncement 06-02-2020 Nitin N. Shewale & 2 others आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : These three appeals by different but connected assessees relating to the assessment year