Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2016 (9) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2016 (9) TMI 306 - HC - Income Tax


Issues:
Delay in filing appeal condonation - ITAT's decision on benefit of 30% deduction for "free of cost supplies" - Legal infirmity in ITAT and DRP orders - Substantial question of law for determination.

Delay in filing appeal condonation:
The High Court condoned a two-day delay in filing the appeal after considering the reasons provided. The application for condonation of delay was disposed of accordingly.

ITAT's decision on benefit of 30% deduction for "free of cost supplies":
The appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 contested the ITAT's order directing a 30% benefit to the Assessee in the profit margin of Titagarh Wagons Ltd. for "free of cost supplies" received from the Railways. The Revenue argued that without quantifying the exact amount of "free of cost supplies," there was no basis for allowing the 30% deduction. However, the Assessee had estimated the provision of free wheel sets to be 30% of sales value based on a public interview by the Managing Director of TWL. The DRP instructed the TPO to gather information about the value of "free of cost supplies" and directed that if the information was not received within a reasonable period, the benefit of 30% deduction should be given. The ITAT observed that proper consideration of free materials provided by the Railways was necessary while deciding on comparables, and directed the TPO to take into account 30% additional cost base for "free of cost" material to revise the OP/TC margin for determining the arm's length margin as claimed by the Assessee.

Legal infirmity in ITAT and DRP orders - Substantial question of law for determination:
After hearing the submissions of the Revenue's counsel and reviewing the orders of the ITAT and DRP, the Court found no legal infirmity in either order that would give rise to any substantial question of law for determination. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

This judgment addressed issues related to the condonation of delay in filing the appeal, the ITAT's decision on the benefit of 30% deduction for "free of cost supplies," and the legal infirmity in the ITAT and DRP orders. The Court upheld the ITAT's directive regarding the 30% deduction and found no substantial question of law for determination, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates