9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1868X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Coming to the second step, wherein it is the duty of Assessing Officer / TPO to benchmark two activities separately. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer / TPO to apply TNMM method and go through the comparables selected by assessee and determine the arm's length price of international transactions entered into by assessee with its associated enterprises under the umbrella of manufacturing activity and also as part of trading activities. The two activities have to be benchmarked separately and independently, for which reasonable opportunity of hearing shall be provided to the assessee. Accordingly, we remit the issue back to the file of Assessing Officer / TPO in this regard. The grounds of appeal raised by Revenue are thus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that the issue raised in the present appeal is squarely covered by earlier orders of the Tribunal in assessee s own case. 4. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue relying on the order of Assessing Officer fairly admitted that the issue stands covered by the orders of Tribunal in earlier years. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. Briefly, in the facts of the case, the assessee was engaged in manufacturing and trading of hydraulic accessories and spares. The assessee was wholly owned subsidiary of Walter Stauffenberg, Germany. The Assessing Officer noted that business profile of assessee company included import of accessories and compo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... comparables was 8.30%. The assessee had selected two companies as comparables on the basis of search conducted. The Assessing Officer was of the view that there was no logic for bifurcating the trading activity into domestic sales and export sales. He proposed to aggregate and benchmark all the transactions using the set of comparables selected following TNMM method. Since the assessee had calculated margins of comparables on the basis of average of preceding two years, the assessee was directed to apply the data of contemporaneous period, as per which the average worked out to 12.82%. The assessee was thus, show caused in this regard. The Assessing Officer did not accept the plea of assessee for benchmarking two transactions separately and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o consideration all the evidences including additional evidence observed that manufacturing activity was being carried out by the assessee. 10. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that the adjustment has been made in the hands of assessee on the ground that the assessee is not engaged in any manufacturing activity but the Tribunal upheld the order of CIT(A) and held that there was manufacturing activity carried on by the assessee. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that the TPO had aggregated two transactions on the ground that there was one activity and no substantial manufacturing was being carried out, whereas the CIT(A) held that two activities were undertaken by the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
