TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 1408X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee that TPO has accepted the assessee s claim for such adjustment in succeeding year i.e. 2013-14 the Ld. CIT(A) directed the AO/TPO to allow adjustment for credit period. It is the case of the Revenue that no such claim was accepted by the TPO in the assessment year 2013-14 and adjustment was not made in the said year as the variation was within the prescribed tolerance limit of +/- 5%. CIT(A) in directing the AO/TPO to consider entire set of transactions as against the transactions considered by the TPO in the order passed u/s 154 - In so far as bench marking the international transactions using customs data is concerned we sustain the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) as the Ld. CIT(A) observed that the Chennai Bench of the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For the Revenue : Shri Mrinal Kumar Das, Sr. DR For the Assessee : None ORDER PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-44, New Delhi dated 29.06.2018 for the AY 2012-13. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in directing the AO/TPO to benchmark the international transaction of the assessee by using customs data, ignoring the widely accepted principle that the customs valuation cannot be indiscriminately used for the purpose of determining the Arm s Length Price under the Income Tax Act as the purpose and criteria governing the cu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice was served on the assessee by way of affixture at the last known address. Copy of service report furnished by the notice server and the Inspector, Circle 16(1), New Delhi was placed on record by the Ld. DR. In spite of service of notice as the assessee is not coming forward to appear before the Tribunal in the case filed by the Revenue we proceed to dispose off this appeal on hearing the Ld. DR. 3. The Ld. DR submits that draft assessment order in this case was passed on 21.03.2016 proposing Transfer Pricing adjustment amounting to Rs.6,90,08,437/- but later on the TPO vide his order dated 30.03.2016 passed u/s 154 reduced the amount of TP adjustment to Rs.3,94,33,122/- as there were some arithmetical mistakes in the earlier order pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt to the AY 2013-14. 4. Heard the Ld. DR perused the orders of the authorities below. In so far as ground no. 1 is concerned we observe that the Revenue challenged the order of the Ld.CIT(A) in directing the AO/TPO to benchmark the international transaction of the assessee by using customs data. 4.1 On perusal of the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals), we observe that the assessee contended that the international transaction should be benchmarked using custom valuation data and relied on the decision of the Chennai Bench of Tribunal in the case of Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2011) 12 taxmann.com 355. The Ld. CIT(A) following this decision directed the TPO to benchmark the international transaction for the purchase of fuel oil/HSD by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l transfer pricing order passed by him as the scope of rectification u/s 154 is limited and not extend to the issues involving interpretation of law. 6.3 Considering the submissions of the assessee, we observe that the Ld. CIT(A) directed the TPO/AO to consider the entire set of transactions as has been done in the impugned order of the TPO dated 30.03.2016. 7. In so far as bench marking the international transactions using customs data is concerned we sustain the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) as the Ld. CIT(A) observed that the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (supra) held that the valuation was made by custom authorities by assigning values to import goods on the basis of scientifically ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|