2018 (7) TMI 2048 - HC - Income Tax

TP Adjustment - addition made by the TPO on account of guarantees provided by the assessee - adjustment in respect to loan granted by the assessee to its Associated Enterprises - tribunal deleted the additions - HELD THAT - Revenue very fairly states that both the questions raised by the Revenue now stands concluded against the Revenue by the decision of this Court in Respondent Assessee's own case for earlier Assessment Year. Our attention is invited to the orders in CIT v/s. M/s. Everest Kento Cylinders Ltd. 2015 (5) TMI 395 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT on an identical issues. In fact, the impugned order of the Tribunal, follows its orders for the earlier Assessment Years, which were the subject of the above appeals to this Court. No substantial questions of law,

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for Assessment Year 2009-10.
2. Deletion of addition made by the Transfer Pricing Officer on account of guarantees provided by the assessee.
3. Deletion of addition made by the Transfer Pricing Officer on account of adjustment in respect to loan granted by the assessee to its Associated Enterprises.

Analysis:
The High Court of Bombay heard an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging the order dated 27th February, 2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for Assessment Year 2009-10. The Revenue raised two questions of law regarding the deletion of additions made by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO). The first question was whether the Tribunal was correct in deleting the addition on account of guarantees provided by the assessee. The second question was whether the Tribunal was correct in deleting the addition on account of adjustment in respect to a loan granted by the assessee to its Associated Enterprises.

During the proceedings, Mr. Tejveer Singh, representing the Revenue, acknowledged that the questions raised by the Revenue had already been decided against them in earlier Assessment Years by the High Court. He referred to specific orders of the Court in similar cases where the issues were addressed. The High Court noted that the impugned order of the Tribunal was consistent with its previous decisions on the same matters. Consequently, the Court found that the questions raised did not present any substantial legal issues as they had already been settled by the Court in earlier cases.

Based on the above analysis, the High Court concluded that the questions raised by the Revenue were not substantial and had already been addressed in previous judgments. Therefore, the Court dismissed the appeal, ruling in favor of the Respondent-Assessee. No costs were awarded in the matter.