9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (8) TMI 201 - AT - Income TaxRectification u/s 254 - HELD THAT - It is the basic principle of jurisprudence that if any mistake is committed by the tribunal, it needs to be rectified as no one should suffer on account of the mistake committed by the court. Even the rules of procedures and technicalities should not come in the way in rendering justice to the parties by correcting the mistake committed by the tribunal. In the instant case the ITAT has wrongly assumed that the reference to the TPO by the AO for deciding the arm length price with respect to the international transactions was not valid as the quantum involved was less than ₹15 crores. This assumption of the ITAT was based on the statement made by the assessee. The mistake committed by the learned counsel for the assessee was also admitted at the time of hearing. As important to note that the learned DR also at the time of hearing has not controverted the proposition canvassed by the learned AR for the assessee. Rather the learned DR was agreed to the proposition suggested by the AR at the time of hearing. It is not material how the mistake was committed by the tribunal. What is material is the mistake committed by the tribunal in deciding the issue on hand, though on the wrong statement of the learned counsel for the assessee. Tribunal has wrongly assumed the fact that the AO has accidentally referred the matter to the TPO for the determination of arm length price whereas there was no such reference made by the AO. The wrong assumption of facts which are crucial to decide the issue, will constitute mistake apparent from record. We recall the ground No. 1 raised by the Revenue for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law. The appeal may be listed for hearing on 26 July 2021. As the date of hearing has been pronounced in the open court, there is no need to send separate notice of hearing to either party.
Issues:
1. Rectification of mistake apparent from record in ITAT Orders for Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. Recalling the order of ITAT due to errors in determining arm's length price for international transactions. 3. Setting aside issues related to Transfer Pricing provisions for fresh adjudication. Issue 1: Rectification of mistake apparent from record in ITAT Orders for Assessment Year 2010-2011: The Assessee filed two Miscellaneous Applications against ITAT Orders in ITA Nos. 951 & 1370/Ahd/2015 dated 04/03/2019 for the Assessment Year 2010-2011. The Assessee sought to recall the order of ITAT due to a mistake apparent from the record. The ITAT had set aside the issue to the file of the CIT (A) regarding the reference to the TPO for the determination of ALP concerning international transactions. The Assessee pointed out errors in the ITAT order, specifically related to the need for reference to the TPO, which was not made by the AO. The Tribunal agreed that the mistake was apparent from the record and recalled the ground raised by the Revenue for fresh adjudication. Issue 2: Recalling the order of ITAT due to errors in determining arm's length price for international transactions: The ITAT wrongly assumed that the reference to the TPO by the AO for deciding the arm's length price for international transactions was not valid due to the transaction value being less than ?15 crores. This assumption was based on the Assessee's counsel's statement, which was later admitted as a mistake. The ITAT acknowledged the mistake and recalled the ground raised by the Revenue for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal emphasized rectifying mistakes to ensure justice and prevent anyone from suffering due to errors committed by the court. Issue 3: Setting aside issues related to Transfer Pricing provisions for fresh adjudication: The ITAT set aside the issues raised by the Assessee related to Transfer Pricing provisions, including grounds 3 to 6, for fresh adjudication by the CIT (A). As the validity of reference to the TPO was to be decided by the CIT (A) based on the direction provided in the Revenue's appeal, the ITAT deemed it premature to address the Assessee's grievances at that stage. The Assessee's counsel requested the recall of grounds 3 to 6 for fresh adjudication, along with ground 2(d) related to transfer pricing provisions. The ITAT agreed to recall these grounds for fresh adjudication in the interest of justice and fair play. In conclusion, the ITAT allowed both Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Assessee, emphasizing the importance of rectifying mistakes to ensure justice and fair adjudication in tax matters. The orders were pronounced on 04/05/2021 at Ahmedabad.
|
