9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 988X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C of this company at 16.15%. The detailed calculation is given along with this letter. Without adversely commenting on such calculation, the TPO proceeded to include a different percentage while calculating the arithmetic mean of OP/TC of the comparable companies. The ld. CIT(A) substituted the correct OP/TC as was given to the TPO. In our considered opinion, there is no admission of any additiona ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relation to the assessment year 2005-06. 2. The only ground raised by the Revenue is against accepting fresh evidence by the ld. CIT(A) in contravention of Rule 46A(3) of the IT Rules, without giving opportunity to the TPO. The ld. DR contended that the dispute in the present appeal is about the adopting of a different rate of OP/TC of two companies, namely, Asian Cerc Information Technology L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of additional evidence in the calculation of this OP/TC margin. 4. It is noticed that the assessee, vide its letter dated 13.10.2008 addressed to the TPO, a copy of which is placed on pages 233 onwards of the paper book, calculated unadjusted OP/TC of this company at 16.15%. The detailed calculation is given along with this letter. Without adversely commenting on such calculation, the TPO proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that there is no admission of additional evidence by the ld. CIT(A). This figure of 13.65% was given by the assessee to the TPO vide the same letter in the same table No.4, a copy of which is available on page 252 of the paper book. A detailed calculation of this OP/TC was also submitted before the TPO. Without adversely commenting on the calculation of OP/TC at 13.65%, the TPO proceeded to adop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
