DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE vs. M/S. CARRARO INDIA PVT.LTD,, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

220 Maharashtra, India PAN : AAACC5292M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri M.P. Lohia & Shri Rajendra Agiwal Revenue by Shri Sanjeev Ghei Date of hearing 26-02-2019 Date of pronouncement 27-02-2019 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : These are two cross appeals - one by the assessee and the other by the Revenue - arise out of a common order

SAS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT (INDIA) PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE

In the result, Ground No‟s

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviphysical Court Of Hearing आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1959/Pun/2018 निर्ाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sas Research & Development The Asst. Commissioner Of (India) Private Limited, Vs Income Tax, Circle-6, Pune. Level1, 2A & 3, Tower 5, Cybercity, Magarpatta City, Hadapsar, Pune – 411 0103 Pan: Aaecs 8099 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajendra Agiwal– Ar Revenue By Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav - Dr Date Of Hearing 11/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 19/04/2022 आदेश / Order Per Ss Viswanethra Ravi, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-6, Pune Dated 31.10.2018 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Assessee Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Inappropriate Transfer Pricing Adjustment Even Though The Pricing Of All International Transactions Of The Appellant Was At Arm’S Length Erred On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law By Making/Confirming Transfer Pricing Adjustment By Rejecting The Analysis Undertaken By The Appellant To Determine Arm‟S Length Price Of Its International Transactions Pertaining To Rendering Of Software Development Support, Consultancy & Training Services To The Aes. 2. Inappropriate Rejection Of The Transfer Pricing Documentation Appropriately Maintained By The Appellant Erred On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law By Inappropriately Rejecting The Transfer Pricing Documentation Appropriately Maintained By The Appellant & By Inappropriately Conducting A Fresh Search For Benchmarking The Appellant‟S International Transactions.

Transfer Pricing Guidelines provide fundamental principle that the adjustment made should be reasonably accurate. None of the workings on the risk adjustment can be considered reasonably accurate. The assessee has requested for risk adjustment. This issue is also considered. “Thus, there is no unanimity on the issue of granting risk adjustment, leave alone prescribing of sound methodology to grant risk

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE vs. M/S. CARRARO INDIA PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1261/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Carraro India Private Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Limited, Pune B-2/2, Midc, Ranjangaon, Pune – 412 220 Maharashtra, India Pan : Aaacc5292M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1309/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/S. Carraro India Private Pune Limited, B-2/2, Midc, Ranjangaon, Pune – 412 220 Maharashtra, India Pan : Aaacc5292M Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri M.P. Lohia Revenue By Shri Shivraj B. Morey Date Of Hearing 14-07-2021 Date Of Pronouncement 15-07-2021

section 37 of the Act, he made the addition for the full amount of M/s. Carraro India Pvt. Ltd. Rs.2.36 crore. The ld. CIT(A) overturned the assessment order on the disallowance made by the AO u/s.37 of the Act and also did not approve the capitalization of the Royalty by the AO. He, however, countenanced the transfer pricing adjustment

M/S. CARRARO INDIA PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1261/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Carraro India Private Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Limited, Pune B-2/2, Midc, Ranjangaon, Pune – 412 220 Maharashtra, India Pan : Aaacc5292M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1309/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs. M/S. Carraro India Private Pune Limited, B-2/2, Midc, Ranjangaon, Pune – 412 220 Maharashtra, India Pan : Aaacc5292M Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri M.P. Lohia Revenue By Shri Shivraj B. Morey Date Of Hearing 14-07-2021 Date Of Pronouncement 15-07-2021

section 37 of the Act, he made the addition for the full amount of M/s. Carraro India Pvt. Ltd. Rs.2.36 crore. The ld. CIT(A) overturned the assessment order on the disallowance made by the AO u/s.37 of the Act and also did not approve the capitalization of the Royalty by the AO. He, however, countenanced the transfer pricing adjustment

M/S. TASTY BITE EATABLES LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 7,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

section 144C(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called „the Act‟) in relation to the assessment year 2014-15. 2. Succinctly, the factual matrix of the case is that the assessee, who is engaged in the manufacture and sale of ready to eat foods, filed its return declaring total income of Rs.1,88,570, which was subsequently

GRUPO ANTOLIN IRAUSA S.A.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY DIRECOTR OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryिनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 Groupo Antolin Irausa S.A. Vs. Ddit C/O. B-25, Midc, (International Taxation)-1, Ranjangaon, Shirur, Pune Pune 412 220 Pan : Aadcg9626L Appellant Respondent

220 PAN : AADCG9626L Appellant Respondent Assessee by: Shri J.D. Mistri, Sr. Advocate Revenue by: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav Date of hearing 27-07-2022 Date of pronouncement 28-07-2022 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-13, Pune on 23-03-2017 in relation

SATARA ENGINEERING PROJECTS AND EQUIPMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SATARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2450/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2024-25

transfer of a capital asset on which no depreciation is allowable under the Act shall be computed at the rate of twenty-two per cent: Provided also that where the person fails to satisfy the conditions contained in sub-section (2) in any previous year, the option shall become invalid in respect of the assessment year relevant to that previous

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 11,, PUNE vs. HSBC SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,, PUNE

In the result, CO of assessee is allowed and the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

transfer pricing regulation cannot be regarded as the ordinary profits, and it is further contended that the TPO held that the transactions with its AEs are at arm’s length, the profits earned by the assessee company should be accepted as ordinary profits. Rejecting the above submissions, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee company earned more than ordinary profits

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 11,, PUNE vs. HSBC SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT (INDIA) PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, CO of assessee is allowed and the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

transfer pricing regulation cannot be regarded as the ordinary profits, and it is further contended that the TPO held that the transactions with its AEs are at arm’s length, the profits earned by the assessee company should be accepted as ordinary profits. Rejecting the above submissions, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee company earned more than ordinary profits

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

transfer of all or any rights (including the granting of any license) in respect of copyright of a literary, artistic or scientific work. Section 2(o) of the Copyright Act makes it clear that a computer programme is to be regarded as a 'literary work'. Thus, in order to treat the consideration paid by the cellular operator as royalty

TIBCO SOFTWARE BV,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE -2,, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

transfer of all or any rights (including the granting of any license) in respect of copyright of a literary, artistic or scientific work. Section 2(o) of the Copyright Act makes it clear that a computer programme is to be regarded as a 'literary work'. Thus, in order to treat the consideration paid by the cellular operator as royalty

TIBCO SOFTWARE BV,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (IT), CIRCLE-2,, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

transfer of all or any rights (including the granting of any license) in respect of copyright of a literary, artistic or scientific work. Section 2(o) of the Copyright Act makes it clear that a computer programme is to be regarded as a 'literary work'. Thus, in order to treat the consideration paid by the cellular operator as royalty

M/S. ADLER MEDIEQUIP PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(1),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the AO, based on directions of DRP, has erred in holding that the deduction in respect of non-compete fees amounting to Rs 8,26,31,590 claimed by the assessee is not allowable as revenue expenditure, on the grounds that the same is capital

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AURANGABAD vs. VISTA NIRMAN PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12

transfer pricing adjustment. It is hereby informed that the Board has accepted the decision of the High Court of Bombay in the above mentioned Writ Petition. In view of the acceptance of the above judgment, it is directed that the ratio decidenal of the judgment must be adhered to by the field officers in all cases where this issue

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1 (2),, PUNE vs. M/S. EATON INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

price of EIC (USA) and therefore, the profitability is shown less to that extent even in USA. 4. On the facts of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that by arranging its affair with AE, the assessee has inflated the profit in India on which deduction u/s 10A is claimed and assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1 (2),, PUNE vs. M/S. EATON INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

price of EIC (USA) and therefore, the profitability is shown less to that extent even in USA. 4. On the facts of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that by arranging its affair with AE, the assessee has inflated the profit in India on which deduction u/s 10A is claimed and assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1 (2),, PUNE vs. M/S. EATON INDUSTRIES PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

price of EIC (USA) and therefore, the profitability is shown less to that extent even in USA. 4. On the facts of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that by arranging its affair with AE, the assessee has inflated the profit in India on which deduction u/s 10A is claimed and assessee

KARDA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

220/-. Under scrutiny notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. In response to the said notices authorized representative on the behalf of the assessee appeared before the AO and furnished the details. The AO completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act determining the total income of Rs.5