9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 452X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... now available for consideration. Respectfully following the predominant view taken in several Tribunal orders of co-ordinate benches, we are of the considered opinion that it would be in the fitness of things if the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of TPO/AO for a fresh determination of the question as to whether there exists an international transaction of AMP expenses. If the existence of such an international transaction is not proved, the matter will end there and then, calling for no transfer pricing addition. If, on the other hand, the international transaction is found to be existing, then the TPO will determine the ALP of such an international transaction in the light of the relevant judgments of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e provisions of section 145A. - ITA No.479/Del./2015, ITA No.958/Del./2016 - - - Dated:- 6-4-2017 - SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT and MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri Kanchun Kaushal, CA, Ms. Shruti Khimta,Advocate For The Revenue : Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: These two appeals filed by the assessee relate to the Assessment Years 2010-11 and 2011-12. Since common issues are raised in these appeals, we are, therefore, disposing them off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 2. The first issue raised by the assessee in its appeal is against the addition of ₹ 3,55,87,494 made by the AO on account of tran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t accepted such contention at its level and remitted the matter to the file of AO/TPO for a fresh determination. 5. The ld. DR, similar to Reebok (supra) and Nikon s case (supra), also relied on the judgment of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 118 (Del) in which AMP expenses have been held to be an international transaction and the matter of determination of its ALP has been restored. It was contended that the instant assessee is a Distributor and hence covered by the ratio of the judgment by the Hon ble High Court in the case of Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (supra) . He also relied on a later judgment of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in Yum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n which the question as to whether AMP expenses is an international transaction, has been restored for a fresh determination. Similar to Reebok and Nikon s cases (supra), he still further referred to three later judgments of the Hon ble Delhi High Court, viz., Rayban Sun Optics India Ltd. VS. CIT (dt. 14.9.2016), Pr. CIT VS. Toshiba India Pvt. Ltd . (dt. 16.8.2016) and Pr. CIT VS. Bose Corporation (India) Pvt. Ltd. (dt. 23.8.2016) in all of which similar issue has been restored for fresh determination in the light of the earlier judgment in Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) . The ld. DR argued that the Hon ble Delhi High Court in its earlier decision in Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e High Court, after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Similar view has been recently taken by the Delhi tribunal in its order dated March, 2017 in the case of Louis Vuitton India Retail P. Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No.775/Mum/2015). 7. The only other issue raised in this appeal is against the addition amounting to ₹ 16,72,848/- on account of difference in the closing stock valuation as per section 145A of the Act on accounting of non-inclusion of Special Additional Duty (SAD). 8. The facts apropos this ground are that the assessee valued its stock on `exclusion method of valuation', that is, without including the effect of any tax, duty or cess etc. The AO invoked the provisions of section 145A and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Hon ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Mahavir Alluminium (2008) 297 ITR 77 (Del.) and the Hon ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 318 ITR 116 (Bom.) have held to this extent. As the AO has not adjusted all the relevant figures with the amount of tax, duty, cess etc., we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of A.O. for deciding it afresh in accordance with the afore-noted judgements and the provisions of section 145A. Needless to say, the assessee will be allowed a reasonable opportunity of hearing in this regard. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 11. Only two issues raised in this appeal are challenge t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
