Wipro GE Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) In respect of transfer pricing addition made by Ld.AO. It is observed that DRP/TPO for year under consideration did not consider objections raised by assessee against comparables selected by Ld.TPO and simply followed DRP directions issued for AY 2014-15. As AY: 2014-15 has been set aside […]
DCIT Vs Tally Solutions Pvt.Ltd. (ITAT Bangalore) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of DCIT v. Control Risks India (P.) Ltd. reported in 107 taxmann.com 83, had held that when TPO proposes additions to assessee’s ALP, the AO is duty bound to pass a draft assessment order. It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court […]
The exercise of ALP determination has to be undertaken each year separately by considering the facts and circumstances that are relevant and germane to the issue for that particular year.
The Himalaya Drug Company Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) The admitted facts are that the children and grand children of Mr. Meeraj Alim Manal, has studied/studies in the school in which the assessee has contributed for construction of swimming pool. It is the contention of the assessee that its name is displayed alongside of the swimming […]
Foreign exchange fluctuation gain/loss should be treated as operating profit/loss in nature while computing the profit margin of the assessee as well as of the comparable companies.
Shambala Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) The assessee is owning a building and is in the business of real estate development. The assessee declared income from house property and income from other sources. The Learned Assessing officer has completed the assessment at a total income of Rs. 1,16,64,440/- as against the declared income […]
Assetz Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the interest free advances received from customers was available with the assessee to the tune of Rs.16.96 crores as noticed by Ld CIT(A) at page 28 of his order, i.e., Rs.14.22 crores under Schedule V and Rs.2.74 […]
ACIT Vs Acer India Private Limited (ITAT Bangalore) Conclusion: No disallowance under section 40(a)(i) could be made as there could not be a retrospective obligation to deduct tax at source and therefore as on the date when assessee made payments to the non-resident for acquiring off-the-shelf software, could not be regarded as in the nature […]
DCIT Vs GE BE Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Bangalore) Conclusion: Education cess is not tax and thus not disallowable under section 40(a)(ii). Held: Assessee-company was engaged in the business of contract manufacturing of components and parts of medical diagnostic imaging equipment and also engaged in provision of engineering design services to its affiliate worldwide. Assessee had […]
The issue under consideration is whether the CIT(A) is correct in stating that TDS u/s 195 applicable on software expenses without appreciating the fact that appellant was merely acting as a distributor and not having right to have a copy of the software?
