THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/s. Value Labs

Bench: P.KESHAVA RAO,V RAMASUBRAMANIAN

section 10A of the Act was not available. ii) Whether the Tribunal erred in law and on facts in rejecting the comparables selected by the Assessee itself as a comparable in its own Transfer Pricing

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VIJAYAWADA vs. M/S. PADMAVATHI MANSION (P) LTD., VIJAYAWADA

Bench: C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,T.AMARNATH GOUD

Section 10A of the IT Act are allowed only in Export Turnover but not from the Total Turnover then, it would give rise to inadvertent, unlawful, meaningless and illogical result which Date of Judgment 05-07-2018 I.T.A.No 700/2017. The Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax, CIT (A) & Anr. Vs. M/s. Global E-Business Operations Pvt. Ltd., 6/15 would cause grave

Commissioner of Income Tax-3, vs. M/s State Bank of Hyderabad

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

10A and 10B are concerned, besides the nature of unit being different Free Trade Zone Unit (S.10A) and 100% EOU Unit (S.10B), the substance of these Date of Judgment 23-07-2018 I.T.A.No.77 /2016 Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr., Vs. M/s. GE Medical Systems India Pvt. Ltd., 9/19 provisions is the same, the difference is only in the categories

The Director of Income Tax, (Exemptions) vs. Exhibition Society

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

10A of the IT Act are allowed only in Export Turnover but not from the Total Turnover then, it would give rise to inadvertent, unlawful, meaningless and illogical result which would cause grave injustice to the Respondent which could have never been the intention of the legislature. 20. Even in common parlance, when the object of the formula

The COmmissioner of Income Tax -IV vs. Nagarjuna Aqua Exports Ltd.,

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

Section 10A provides for exclusion of such expenses from total turnover? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in excluding certain comparable from list of comparable adopted by TPO on the ground of functional dissimilarity by following its earlier which has not reached finality even when said decisions have

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, vs. M/s Novus GBS Private Limited,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

transfer pricing on assessee specific FAR analysis? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in relying on the decision of other Benches of Tribunal, ought to have decided the comparability of these companies on the basis of specific facts brought on record by the TPO in the case of the assessee

Commissioner of Income Tax, Guntur. vs. Agricultural Market Committee, Kangiri.

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

10A, 10AA, 10B, 10BA, 10BB and 10C are the other group of provisions which are special provisions in respect of newly established undertakings either in free trade zones, Special Economic Zones, 100 per cent export oriented undertakings and industrial undertakings in the North Eastern Region. These permit deduction of whole or part of the profits for certain period while computing

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

10A, 10AA, 10B, 10BA, 10BB and 10C are the other group of provisions which are special provisions in respect of newly established undertakings either in free trade zones, Special Economic Zones, 100 per cent export oriented undertakings and industrial undertakings in the North Eastern Region. These permit deduction of whole or part of the profits for certain period while computing

Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply AND Sewerage Board vs. The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax

10A of the IT Act are allowed only in Export Turnover but not from the Total Turnover then, it would give rise to inadvertent, unlawful, meaningless and illogical result which would cause grave injustice to the Respondent which could have never been the intention of the legislature. Date of Judgment 10-07-2018, ITA Nos.390-391/2013 Commissioner of Income

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3 vs. M/s Sri Indra Power Energies Limited

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

section 10A by relying up on the decision of this Hon’ble Court in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd., to exclude the foreign travel both from the total turnover and the export turnover even when the same is not permissible in law and the decision relied upon by Tribunal has not reached finality? (2) Whether, on the facts

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, 6 vs. Vijay Infotech Ventures

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

10A of the IT Act are allowed only in Export Turnover but not from the Total Turnover then, it would give rise to inadvertent, unlawful, meaningless and illogical result which would cause grave injustice to the Respondent which could have never been the intention of the legislature. 20. Even in common parlance, when the object of the formula

The Commissioner of Income Tax [Central] vs. Sri K S V Raja

10A of the IT Act are allowed only in Export Turnover but not from the Total Turnover then, it would give rise to inadvertent, unlawful, meaningless and illogical result which would cause grave injustice to the Respondent Date of Judgment 13-08-2018, ITA No.530/2017 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-6 & Another Vs. M/s. Sandisk India Device Design Centre

Baldev Goverdhan, vs. The Income Tax officer

10A of the IT Act are allowed only Date of Judgment 11-07-2018 I.T.A.No 286/2013. The Commissioner of Income-Tax, CIT (A) & Anr. Vs. M/s. CSR India Pvt. Ltd., 6/11 in Export Turnover but not from the Total Turnover then, it would give rise to inadvertent, unlawful, meaningless and illogical result which would cause grave injustice to the Respondent

M/s. Canara Securities Ltd vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

Bench: M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO,T.AMARNATH GOUD

Section 178 of the Companies Act, 2013. Therefore, the Chairman of the company, HVL cannot arrogate unto himself the power to cause such appointment when such power ultimately rests with the Board of Directors. The observation of the two Joint APLs that the evident performance of BCrL, the flagship company of MP Birla Group is deteriorating ever since, HVL became

The commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. M/s Lanco Kondapalli Power (P) Ltd

10a Surekha Mahendra kumar Shah 10b Mahendrakumar Mafatlal Shah, both of Mumbai Indian Inhabitants, having present address at A/1003 Gokul Vrindavan, Shantilal Modi X Road No.2, Kandivali (West), Mumbai 400 067. 11a Atul Shakaralal Shah 11b Alpa Atul Shah, both adults, of Mumbai, Indian Inhabitants, having present address at B/104 Shanti Apartment No.1, Mathuradas Ext Road, Kandivali (West), Mumbai