9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 1285X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 144C by the Dispute Resolution Panel dated 30-8-2010. 3. At the outset, ld. counsel of the assessee assailed that the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) has not at all considered the assessee s submissions and passed a very laconic and non-speaking direction. In this regard, ld. counsel of the assessee also referred to the order sheet noting dated 23-12-2006 by this tribunal in assessee s own case pertaining to stay. In the said order sheet, it was observed that order of the DRP is not a speaking order. Assessee vide its ground has also raised that direction given by the DRP are not valid and bad in law as the same has been given without considering the arguments, evidence and factual error pointed out by the assessee and without giving an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... merit is seen in the objections of the assessee on the issue of initial reference to the TPO by the Assessing Officer. This matter is settled by the Courts and the reference made by the Assessing Officer is valid. The order of the TPO is abundantly clear that the assessee was given sufficient opportunity of being heard. 2.3 Regarding the choosing of comparables, the DRP has considered the companies selected by the TPO. The view of the DRP is that Satyam Computers should be removed fro the list of comparable companies chosen by the TPO as comparables and the order be modified accordingly. 2.4 The TPO has taken the current year data which is again objected by the assessee. As per the provisions of law, it is mandated that only the current ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onfirm, reduce or enhance the variations proposed in the draft order so, however, that it shall not set aside any proposed variation or issue any direction under sub-section (5) fur further enquiry and passing of the assessment order. (9) If the members of the Dispute Resolution Panel differ in opinion on any point, the point shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the members. (10) Every direction issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel shall be binding on the Assessing Officer. (11) No direction under sub-section (5) shall be issued unless an opportunity of being heard is given to the assessee and the Assessing Officer on such directions which are prejudicial to the interest of the assessee or the interest of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vodafone Essar Ltd. v. Disputes Resolution Panel-II (Delhi) the Hon ble Court has held that when a quasi judicial authority deals with the lis, it is obligatory on its part to ascribe cogent and germane reason as the same is a heart and soul of the matter and further the same also facilitates appreciation when the order is called in question before the superior forum. Accordingly, the Hon ble Court has remanded the matter for fresh adjudication. 8. Under the circumstances, in the background of the aforesaid discussion and precedent above, we find that considerable cogency in the assessee s counsel submission that the assessee s submission has been brushed aside without giving proper consideration by the DRP. 9. Ld. Departmental ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
