9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 259X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i Heavy Industries Ltd. v. Union of India (2011 -TMI - 210159 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT) observing that CBDT to ensure that Jurisdictional Commissioner is not nominated as a member of DRP – considering Sec. 144C that DRP before giving any direction to AO under sub-section (5) to enable him to complete assessment, will give opportunity of being heard to parties on such directions which are prejudicial to the interest of assessee or the interest of Revenue - DRP has not given any reason and/or commented upon the objections of assessee in the said order while agreeing with the adjustments proposed by TPO - order passed by DRP u/s. 144C of the Act is not a speaking order and held to be set aside – AO to pass fresh assessment order - in favour of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ections filed by assessee. Thus, order of DRP is contrary to provisions of I.T. Act. Ld. AR submitted that assessment order is thus liable to be set aside. 3. The Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that composition of DRP is in accordance with provisions of I.T. Act. He submitted that the case of Hyundai Heavy Industries ( supra ) is not applicable to the case of assessee as of that case relate to specific party before Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand. Ld. DR further submitted that as per Provisions of Sec. 92C(4), AO is to proceed as per order of TPO and therefore DRP has rightly stated in para 3.2.1 at page-8 that action of AO is in conformity with the adjustment made by TPO in computing income of the assessee and is as per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... principle that justice must not only be done but seen to be done would be ensured." 6. Considering above observation of Hon'ble High Court of Uttarkhand vide its order dt. 21.7.2011 (supra) and considering the fact that CBDT issued notification dt. 01.09.2011 which is subsequent to the order passed by Hon'ble High Court of Uttarkhand observing that CBDT to ensure that Jurisdictional Commissioner is not nominated as a member of DRP, we find substance in the submission of Ld. AR that order passed by DRP is liable to be set aside as it is contrary to the observation of Hon'ble High Court of Uttarkhand (supra). During the course of hearing, Ld. DR has not been able to controvert the above submission of Ld. AR save and accept submitting tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act provides that DRP before giving any direction to AO under sub-section (5) to enable him to complete assessment, will give opportunity of being heard to parties on such directions which are prejudicial to the interest of assessee or the interest of Revenue. 8. Considering the provisions of Sec. 144C of the Act and order of DRP passed u/s. 144C(5) of the Act dt. 30th September, 2011, placed on record, we observe that DRP has not given any reason and/or commented upon the objections of assessee in the said order while agreeing with the adjustments proposed by TPO. Ld. DR has not disputed the above contention of Ld. AR save and except to submit that AO has to pass order in conformity with the adjustments proposed by TPO and refe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
