9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 1218X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 11/08/2017 and dismiss both the appeals being infructuous. - ITA No. 687/MUM/2013 And ITA No. 879/MUM/2013 - - - Dated:- 18-8-2017 - SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) For The Appellant : Shri Yogesh Than (AR) For The Respondent : Shri Jayant Kumar/Saurabh Deshpande (DR) ORDER PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM These are the cross appeals filed by the assessee and the department against order dated 27/11/2012 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 15, Mumbai, whereby the Ld. CIT (A) has partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee against assessment order passed u/s 143 (3) r/w section 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act ), pertaining to the assessment year 2008-09. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... overseas subsidiary as an international transaction u/s 92B(1) of the Act. 2. The Appellant prays that the order of the learned AO be struck down as bad-in-law. Without prejudice to ground II: Ground No. III: Reclassification of share application money as Loan for the period between date of remittance till the date of allotment of equity shares: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon ble CIT (A) erred in reclassifying the investment in equity shares as a loan, for the time period from remitting the money till the date of allotment of shares and directing the AO to calculate interest at 6 months LIBOR plus 150 basis points for the aforesaid period. 2. The appellant p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he facts and circumstances of the case and in law whether the CIT (A) s erred in deleting adjustment towards Guarantee Fee: 1(i) On the facts and circumstances of the case whether CIT (A) erred in finding that the TPO considered bank guarantee commission rate as CUP when he has considered the bank guarantee commission as only the basis for arriving at a CuP rate and adding 0.35% for additional risks associated with foreign currency, as loan is in Great Britain Pound (GBP). 1. (ii) On the facts and circumstances of the case, whether CIT (A) erred in equating bank guarantee with corporate guarantee when bank guarantee cannot be issued against a loan and also when the risk in case of corporate guarantee is higher than that in bank ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he facts that the cost of funds in India, whether borrowed or surplus would be linked to interest rate prevent in India and thus lending transaction should have been benchmarked using the interest rate prevalent in India. 2 (iv) On the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the CIT (A) erred in benchmarking the interest on lending transaction in foreign currency with international benchmark like LIBOR when the Indian entities is also bearing foreign exchange and other risks and the prevailing interest rates in India would take care of all such risks and thus should have been adopted for benchmarking interest rates. 2(v) On the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the CIT (A) erred in adopting LIBOR plus 150 /250 ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee has allocated interest cost to units on the basis of turnover. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the CIT (A) erred in allowing the assessee s claim of deduction u/s 35(2AB) amounting to ₹ 65,30,88,285/- which was not allowed by the AO for want of Form 3CL from the appropriate authority (DSIR) for the current year under reference. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the CIT (A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO u/s 40 (a) of the Act amounting to ₹ 6,94,82,067/- without appreciating the fact that the payments were made by the assessee to non-residents on account of pilot bio-study, clinical research, whereas per section 195 of the Act, the assessee is liable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the fact that any amount set aside to provision made for meeting unascertained liabilities has to be added back for computing the net profit u/s 115JB. 11. On the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the CIT (A) erred in deleting deleting the addition of Provision of bad and doubtful debts ₹ 3,69,50,000/- which needs to be considered for calculation of Book Profit u/s 115JB, without appreciating the fact that any amount set aside to provision made for meeting unascertained liabilities has to be added back for computing the net profit u/s 115JB. 12. On the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the CIT (A) erred in deleting deleting the addition of expenses disallowable u/s 14A ₹ 22,81,641/- which n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
