9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 1208 - AT - Income TaxAMP expenses - application of Bright-line test - Held that - We find that the issues in dispute are similar and identical to the issues raised in assessee s own case for A.Y. 2008-09, therefore, we respectfully follow the orders of the ITAT, Delhi as well as the order passed in the case of Sony Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT 2015 (9) TMI 484 - ITAT DELHI , we set aside the issues in dispute to the file of the AO with the direction to decide the same, in view of the ITAT, Special Bench decision in the case of LG Electronics (2013 (6) TMI 217 - ITAT DELHI).
Issues:
1. Judicial discipline and natural justice 2. Transfer pricing issues 3. Penalty Judicial Discipline and Natural Justice: The appellant challenged the assessment order on the grounds of judicial discipline and natural justice. The appellant argued that the order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) and other relevant authorities did not follow the decisions of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and Delhi High Court on similar issues and facts. The appellant contended that the assessment order was bad in law and void ab-initio due to the lack of adherence to judicial discipline. Transfer Pricing Issues: Several grounds related to transfer pricing were raised by the appellant. The key issues included whether the AMP expenses incurred by the appellant were solely for the benefit of its associated enterprise, whether the expenses were part of the distribution business, and whether the appellant's functions, including AMP, should be benchmarked separately. The appellant argued that the limited distributor function had been adequately compensated by the associated enterprise and that once the net operating margins met the arm's length test, there was no need for further adjustments. The appellant also questioned the application of the bright-line method and whether sales promotion expenses could be considered AMP expenses. Penalty: Regarding penalty issues, the appellant disputed the findings of the Assessing Officer and Dispute Resolution Panel, alleging inaccuracies in the particulars of income, failure to maintain transaction information, and non-furnishing of reports under relevant sections of the Act. The appellant sought relief from penalty proceedings initiated under the Income Tax Act. In the judgment, the Tribunal noted the precedents set in the appellant's previous cases for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10, where similar transfer pricing issues had been remanded back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. Citing the decisions of the ITAT and the Delhi High Court, the Tribunal set aside the transfer pricing issues in dispute to the AO for reevaluation in accordance with the Special Bench decision in LG Electronics Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT. The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the need for consistent application of legal principles and precedents in transfer pricing matters.
|
