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

viii) Shipping the material to warehouses in Singapore and Mauritius ix) Shipping the material to different countries based on the orders in some cases x) Preparing the packing slips to be pasted on the shipments xi) Tracking the expiry date of the medicines in warehouses in Singapore and Mauritius as well as India and the shipped goods in transit

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

viii) Shipping the material to warehouses in Singapore and Mauritius ix) Shipping the material to different countries based on the orders in some cases x) Preparing the packing slips to be pasted on the shipments xi) Tracking the expiry date of the medicines in warehouses in Singapore and Mauritius as well as India and the shipped goods in transit

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

viii) Shipping the material to warehouses in Singapore and Mauritius ix) Shipping the material to different countries based on the orders in some cases x) Preparing the packing slips to be pasted on the shipments xi) Tracking the expiry date of the medicines in warehouses in Singapore and Mauritius as well as India and the shipped goods in transit

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

viii) Shipping the material to warehouses in Singapore and Mauritius ix) Shipping the material to different countries based on the orders in some cases x) Preparing the packing slips to be pasted on the shipments xi) Tracking the expiry date of the medicines in warehouses in Singapore and Mauritius as well as India and the shipped goods in transit

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

viii) Shipping the material to warehouses in Singapore and Mauritius ix) Shipping the material to different countries based on the orders in some cases x) Preparing the packing slips to be pasted on the shipments xi) Tracking the expiry date of the medicines in warehouses in Singapore and Mauritius as well as India and the shipped goods in transit

DEPUTY COMMSSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. IGATE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita. No.342/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

price of an article, it held that the same could not be considered as 9 and IT(TP) A.No.10/Bang/2014 royalty either under the Act or the DTAA. Similar view has been reiterated in CIT Vs. ZTE Corporation (2017) 392 ITR 890 (Delhi). 9. It can be seen from the discussion made in the immediately preceding paragraphs that there

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

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ Ita No. 1865/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 1999-2000 Mercedes Benz India Private Limited. ( Formerly Known As Daimler Chrysler India Private Limited) E-3, Midc Chakan, Phase-Iii, Chakan Industrial Area, Kuruli & Nighoje, Tal : Khed, Pune-410 501. Pan : Aabcm 1789L .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-9, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

viii) Once the assesee incurs any cost towards acquisition of the know how, deduction for the same was always intended to be allowed to the assessee. (ix) Since MB India has issues shares in lieu of a genuine pre existing debit (and not against technical know-how received from MBAG) the issue of shares in fact should be considered

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. DAIMLER CHRYSLER INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1381/Pun/2003 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 1998-09 वष"

viii) Custom duty payable 4,15,19,739 ix) Provision for bad debts 1,08,67,587 x) Provision for write off on 19,13,60,149 material/finish goods √ xi) Excess interest provision reversed 1,72,87,043 xii) Donation 35,500 xiii) Stamp/Registration charges on 68,47,448 increase in share capital xiv) Provision for unrealized loss on 1

DAIMLER CHRYSLER INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1381/Pun/2003 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 1998-09 वष"

viii) Custom duty payable 4,15,19,739 ix) Provision for bad debts 1,08,67,587 x) Provision for write off on 19,13,60,149 material/finish goods √ xi) Excess interest provision reversed 1,72,87,043 xii) Donation 35,500 xiii) Stamp/Registration charges on 68,47,448 increase in share capital xiv) Provision for unrealized loss on 1

DCIT CIRCLE 1 NASHIK, NASHIK vs. SHREE SAI PROPERTIES, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

36 ITA.No.987/PUN./2025 (M/s. Shree Sai Properties) the Ld. AO extrapolated this information to presume further unaccounted sales of Rs. 7,93,62,371/- thereby making an addition of Rs. 8,80,26,071/- (Rs. 86,63,700+ Rs. 7,93,62,371) to the income of the assessee as unaccounted sales in respect of plots at survey

SHRI MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1)PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.91 To 96/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Central Circle- Chhajed, 1(1), Pune. 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.97 & 98/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Shri Manoj Madanlal Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.725/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent

prices. At many places only figures have been mentioned without noting whether these are amounts received or paid. I have recorded my statement for such amounts purely on my memory and so they could be vise-versa also. The dates recorded in the Diaries may differ with the dates recorded in the regular books of accounts or the dates

EMERSON CLIMATE TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above and the Stay Applications are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.359/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-12

Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee at the outset pointed out that the issue raised in the present appeal is squarely covered by the order of Tribunal in assessee’s own case in earlier year. He pointed out that TP adjustments were made in the hands of assessee while determining

EMERSON CLIMATE TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) P. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above and the Stay Applications are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.359/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-12

Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee at the outset pointed out that the issue raised in the present appeal is squarely covered by the order of Tribunal in assessee’s own case in earlier year. He pointed out that TP adjustments were made in the hands of assessee while determining

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. COCA-COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the assessment

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1258/Pun/2003 & Ita No.182/Pun/2004 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 1998-99 & 1999-2000 Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of 1107-1110, Pirangut Income Tax, Tal Mulshi,Pune Circle 1(1), Pune Pan : Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent

transferred by the assessee from its own unit. The bottlers produce the beverages known in the market as Coca Cola, Fanta, Sprite etc. The extant dispute is anent to the `Service charges’ paid by the assessee to CCI Inc. amounting to Rs.70.40 crore for rendering services to it and also the unrelated bottlers. The assessee company entered into a tripartite

COCA-COLA INDIA PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the assessment

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1258/Pun/2003 & Ita No.182/Pun/2004 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 1998-99 & 1999-2000 Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of 1107-1110, Pirangut Income Tax, Tal Mulshi,Pune Circle 1(1), Pune Pan : Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent

transferred by the assessee from its own unit. The bottlers produce the beverages known in the market as Coca Cola, Fanta, Sprite etc. The extant dispute is anent to the `Service charges’ paid by the assessee to CCI Inc. amounting to Rs.70.40 crore for rendering services to it and also the unrelated bottlers. The assessee company entered into a tripartite

COCA COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the assessment

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1258/Pun/2003 & Ita No.182/Pun/2004 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 1998-99 & 1999-2000 Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of 1107-1110, Pirangut Income Tax, Tal Mulshi,Pune Circle 1(1), Pune Pan : Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent

transferred by the assessee from its own unit. The bottlers produce the beverages known in the market as Coca Cola, Fanta, Sprite etc. The extant dispute is anent to the `Service charges’ paid by the assessee to CCI Inc. amounting to Rs.70.40 crore for rendering services to it and also the unrelated bottlers. The assessee company entered into a tripartite

VELOCITY TECH-SOL INDIA PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 13, , PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

viii) Companies that are functionally different from you or working in peculiar economic circumstances after giving valid reasons were excluded (ix) Companies that are functionally different from you or working in peculiar economic circumstances after giving valid reasons were excluded (x) The companies whose turnover is 10 time lower or 10 times more than the turnover of the assessee

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