9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 1391X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... identical to the issue decided by us vide grounds no.8 to 11, in Para 14, 15 and 16, wherein we have allowed the issue while following the decision of the Co ordinate Bench of the Tribunal rendered in Kodak India Pvt. Ltd. [ 2013 (11) TMI 667 - ITAT MUMBAI] . Since the issue raised in these grounds no.11 to 13, are identical to the issue decided by us in grounds no.8 to 11 vide Para 14, 15 and 16, as aforesaid, consistent with the view taken therein, we set aside the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) and allow these grounds. Corporate tax adjustment on account of alleged excess deduction u/s 80-IC of the Act - We notice that the Co ordinate Bench has accepted the method of allocation with regard to interest, VRS decrease in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing Officer for verification of the other overheads may be rectified and the disallowance made under section 80 IC of the Act be deleted. 3. The contents of misc. application insofar as assessee s Prayer (a) is concerned, the same is reproduced below: Ground 11 to 13 - Transfer pricing adjustment on-account of payment of service fees to Cadbury Holding Limited 7. During the year under consideration, MIFPL has availed services from Cadbury Schweppes Asia Pacific Pte Limited ('CSAPL') (covered by ground no. 8 to 10) and Cadbury Holding Limited ('CHL') (covered by ground 11 to 13). The Hon'ble ITAT while passing the order for AY 2009-10, allowed payment of service fees by MIFPL to CSAPL (covered b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ving perused the material on record, we find that the related facts and circumstances of the issue raised by the assessee in the grounds no.11 to 13 of the present appeal is materially identical to the issue decided by us vide grounds no.8 to 11, in Para 14, 15 and 16, wherein we have allowed the issue while following the decision of the Co ordinate Bench of the Tribunal rendered in Kodak India Pvt. Ltd. v/s ACIT, [2013] 37 taxmann.com 233 (Mum.). Since the issue raised in these grounds no.11 to 13, are identical to the issue decided by us in grounds no.8 to 11 vide Para 14, 15 and 16, as aforesaid, consistent with the view taken therein, we set aside the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) and allow these grounds. Thus, grounds no. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... operational and establishment expenses have been uniformly allocated and therefore, there is no separate category of other overheads which would require verification. Therefore, the Assessee submits that in the current year, nothing is required to be remitted for verification since there is no separate allocation method for other overheads . It is humbly submitted that the inadvertent mistake apparent from record be corrected and ground 28 be allowed. 7. In view of the above, the concluding Para 38 (para which is above ground no.29 at Page 47) is hereby substituted and be read as under: 38. Therefore, respectfully following the above decision of Co ordinate Bench wherein identical issue is settled in favour of the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
