FROM THE PACKAGE

Logica (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

Section 92C

For benchmarking comparables for assessee company, a company having huge revenue from software products and owing significant intangible could not be accepted as valid comparable.…

AOL Online India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT

Section 92C

For benchmarking comparables for assessee company, companies involved in activity of medical transcription and portfolio management and providing open and end-to-end web solutions and industry specialised services could not be selected…

Royal Bank of Scotland N.V v. Dy DIT, CIT

Section 32

Relying on Mumbai Tribunal ruling in Dy. CIT v. Datacraft India Ltd., it was held that ATM machines were treated as integral part of computer system, therefore they were treated as computer for claim of higher rate of depreciation.…

Srini Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT

Section 92C

Assessing officer/TPO should permit said adjustments claimed by assessee as these factors materially affect price or cost charged or paid, or profit arising from transaction in open market.…

Trimurty Buildcon P. Ltd. v. Dy CIT

Section 271(1)(c) r/w 2(22)(e)

Where returns were regularly filed by assessee providing full particulars of shareholding and advances were in regular course of business, the said transaction of loan receivable could not be treated as deemed dividend…

ITC Ltd. v. CIT

Section 15

Tips being purely voluntary amounts that may or may not be paid by customers for services rendered to them would not fall under section 15 as there is no vested right in the employee to claim any amount of tip from his employer…

Lumax Industries Ltd. v. DCIT

Section 92C

Simply because of the deeming AE nothing changed in the transaction. The tie up and collaboration has only continued as it is apparent from the agreement. Hence royalty addition was not correct.…