Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (1.20 seconds)
Documents citing Dcit Ltu , Mumbai vs Tata Consultancy Services Ltd, Mumbai on 18 November, 2016

Tata Consultancy Services Limited ... vs Deputy Commissioner Of Incometax 3(4), ... on 30 December, 2025

2.1.2 The Id. AO/TPO failed to arrive at a finding that the intention of the Appellant was to evade tax and shift profits outside of India which is a condition precedent for making the Transfer Pricing Adjustment. 2.1.3 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the id. CTT (A) erred in not holding the proceedings initiated by the Id. TPO as void ab initio since the Id. AO erred in making the references to the Id. TPO without proper application of mind to the facts on records, without recording reasons for any necessity or expediency and without a legal and valid approval of the Id. CTT and hence the same being not in accordance with the provisions of Section 92CA(1) of the Act. 2.1.4 The transfer pricing adjustments are contrary to the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the Appellant's own case for the A.Y. 2005-06 (DCIT vs. Tata Consultancy Services Limited) and therefore are required to be quashed and deleted.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 84 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Tata Consultancy Services Ltd, Mumbai vs Asst Cit Ltu-1, Mumbai on 6 April, 2022

83. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It has not been disputed by the Revenue that the facts of the relevant assessment year are similar to preceding assessment years. Further, the TPO has also followed the approach adopted in assessment year 2010-11 while selecting the tested party, PLI and comparables for benchmarking the international transaction. We find that the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee‟s own case in DCIT v. Tata Consultancy Services Ltd., ITA No. 1207/Mum/2018 for assessment year 2010-11 vide order dated 18.08.2020 dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue and upheld the order passed by the CIT(A) observing as under:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 67 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Wissen Infotech Private Limited, ... vs Dcit., Circle-17(2), Hyderabad, ... on 28 February, 2017

The reliance of the ld. AR on the order of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Tata Consultants Services Ltd. (ITA No. 7513/M/2010) dated 4.11.2015, in our considered opinion is misconceived, because, in that case, the Tribunal primarily found that the AO erred in not himself examining the issue of TP and failed to apply his mind to the TP report filed by the assessee. The last sentence in para 54 of the order upholding the assessee's contention that no TP adjustment can be made where the assessee enjoys benefit of deduction u/s 10A or 80HHE, etc., is only obiter dicta inasmuch as the addition was found to be not sustainable on the other main grounds as discussed in the body of the order.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 19 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Gujarat Chamber Of Commerce & Industry & vs Union Of India Thro' Secretary & 2 on 17 March, 2017

[6.20] It   is   further   submitted   by   Shri   Patel,   learned   Advocate  appearing   on   behalf   of   the   respective   petitioners   that   in   the   case   of  Commissioner of Income­tax (LTU) vs. Tata Consultancy Services Ltd.  reported in (2015) 60 Taxmann.com 332 (Bombay), the Bombay High  Court has observed that while levying the FBT the legislature always had  in mind a relationship of employer - employee and by virtue of which,  these benefits are admissible to the employees. It is submitted that after  taking   note   of   the   Budget   speech   of   the   Minister   of   Finance   while  presenting the budget for the year 2005­06, the Explanatory Notes  and  the circulars, it is observed and held that the basis of tax is the benefits  or perquisites which emanate out of an employer­employee relationship.  It is held that there is a perquisite for levy of FBT. It is submitted that in  the said decision the Bombay High Court confirming the order passed by  the   learned   Tribunal   quashed   and   set   aside   the   levy   of   FBT   on   the  expenses   incurred   by   the   assessee   Company   towards   sales   promotion  expenses.
Gujarat High Court Cites 42 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

M/S. J. J. Exporters Ltd., Kolkata vs Dcit, Circle - 11(1), Kolkata, Kolkata on 19 September, 2018

The reliance of the ld. AR on the order of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Tata Consultants Services Ltd. (ITA No. 7513/M/2010) dated 4.11.2015, in our considered opinion is misconceived, because, in that case, the Tribunal primarily found that the AO erred in not himself examining the issue of TP and failed to apply his mind to the TP report filed by the assessee. The last sentence in para 54 of the order upholding the assessee's contention that no TP adjustment can be made where the assessee enjoys benefit of deduction u/s 10A or 80HHE, etc., is only obiter dicta inasmuch as the addition was found to be not sustainable on the other main grounds as discussed in the body of the order.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 35 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

Prem Manohar Gupta, Kanpur vs Astt. Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, ... on 20 March, 2018

5. At the time of hearing before us, the ld. A.R. of the assessee vehemently argued that reference to TPO was a matter containing in Circular of 2016 where it was stated that a reference shall be made to TPO, however, Income Tax statute has given a discretionary power and it is not mandatory for the Assessing Officer to make reference to the ITA No.825/LKW/2017Page 3 of 6 TPO. For that the word in the statute used is "may". Supporting his contention, the ld. A.R. of the assessee relied on the decision of the Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITA No.545/Bang/2012 in the case of M/s Obulapuram Mining Company Pvt. Ltd., Bellary vs. Dy. CIT wherein the Co-ordinate Bench analysed the issue which finds place also in the decision of the ITAT Mumbai Bench wherein the same issue was analysed in the case of DCIT vs. Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. in ITA No.7513/Mum/2010, order dated 4/11/2015 wherein it has been pointed out in para-31 of that order, the Tribunal has followed the same judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs Union of India, 361 ITR 531 and held that the CBDT Instruction No.3 dated 20-05-2003 is contrary and departs from the provisions of law.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Lucknow Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1