9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1479X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is no estoppel against the assessee from demonstrating that a particular comparable was wrongly included in earlier year and, therefore, it should be excluded in this year. - the findings of the ITAT cannot be faulted. - ITA 634/2017, ITA 346/2018, ITA 349/2018, - - - Dated:- 16-4-2018 - MR. S. RAVINDRA BHAT AND MR. A. K. CHAWLA JJ. Present : Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing counsel for appellant. Mr. Vikas Shrivastava, Mr. Mayank Aggarwal and Ms.Kanika Jain, Advocates. MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (Open Court) 1. Revenue s appeal is under Section 260A with respect to inclusion of Brescon Corporate Advisors Limited as a comparable for the purposes of ALP determination under Section 92CA of the Income Tax Act. It i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upra). In that judgment itself the exclusion of Brescon Corporate Advisors Limited on the sole filter of high profits was not accepted; the DRP was tasked with the responsibility of ascertaining the factual basis for functional similarity or dissimilarity as it works considering the risk profile of that comparable in order to carry out necessary adjustments. Chryscapital Investment Advisors (India) Pvt. Ltd. (supra) was for Assessment Year 2008-09. 3. In the present case, the finding with respect to dissimilarity of Brescon Corporate Advisors Ltd. was rendered for A.Y. 2006-07. Though the finding rendered in the case of one entity cannot be considered per se binding, what cannot be lost sight of in the present case is that for A. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ws: 1.The right to appeal is always given by statute and unless specific provision of appeal is there, there cannot be any right to appeal. The appeal and cross objection are at par as far as their admissibility is concerned. Following several decisions cited by the assessee, the Ld. ITAT held that the cross objection filed by the department is non-maintainable and, thus, rejected. 2. The assessee has raised the additional ground related to working capital adjustments and the assessee had also filed an application under Section 154 of the Act before the learned TPO to rectify the aforesaid error and the same is pending. The Ld. ITAT had directed the Assessing Officer to dispose of the petition filed by assessee under Section 154 p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its of KGMC Global Market (India) Ltd., Khandwala Securities Ltd. and Sumedha Fiscal Services Ltd., the Ld. ITAT restored the issue to the file of learned TPO to examine the contentions of both the parties and if they are found to be correct then re-determine operating margin after excluding the impugned amounts and related expenses. 6. On the issue of the AO concluding that in case of directors of the company, the sum paid as commission and bonus could have been paid as profit or dividend which is not the case here, the issue is covered in favour of assessee by the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court vide ITA No.417/2014 in assessee s own case for the assessment year 2008-09. The Learned ITAT found that the ground raised by the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
