9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 493X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions are received. According to rule 11 of The Income Tax (Dispute Resolution Panel) Rules, 2009 the panel shall after the directions issued, communicate the same to the eligible assessee and to the assessing officer. The order is communicated to the assessee on 14 June 2022 at 4.10 p.m. digitally signed by one of the members of the learned dispute resolution panel. According to rule 11 of Dispute Resolution Scheme 2022 dated 5/4/2022 the delivery of such direction would be by placing an authenticated copy of such order in the registered account of the assessee or by sending an authenticated copy to the registered email address of the assessee or any other person. It is not the case of the revenue that the direction is not been received ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 1 above, on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Transfer Pricing)-3(1)(1) ('Learned TPO) erred in proposing upward adjustment amounting to Rs. 9,61,52,233 to total income of Appellant in respect of international transaction of provision of marketing support services and further the learned Dispute Resolution Panel -1, Mumbai (DRP) erred in confirming/enhancing the adjustments to Rs. 12,16,16,158. 3 Without prejudice to ground 1 above, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the law, the learned DRP erred in confirming the action of learned TPO of rejecting the benchmarking analysis using Transaction Net Margin Method (TNMM) conducted by Appellant, based on the compar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considered as comparable in determining the arm's length price of the international transactions i. Concept Public Relations India Limited ii. Deepali Designs Exhibits Private Limited iii. Experience Commerce Software Private Limited iv. Goldmine Advertising Limited V. MCI Management India Private Limited vi. Moms Outdoor Media Solutions Private Limited vii. Killick Agencies Marketing Limited viii. Pioneer Publicity Corporation Private Limited ix. Platinum Communications Private Limited x. PR Pundit Public Relations Private Limited xi. Pressman Advertising Limited xii. MIG Media Neurons Limited xiii. Outdoor Advertising Professionals India Private Limited xiv. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... revenue of Rs. 1,54,48,463 while computing operating profit and operating cost in determining Arm's length price of international transaction of provision of MSS. 10. Without prejudice to ground 1 above, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in the law, the learned TPO/DRP has erred in not appreciating the fact that the benchmarking approach adopted by the Appellant for the provision of MSS in preceding assessment years are consistently followed by Appellant and accepted by department in earlier year. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, delete, modify or withdraw all or any ground or grounds of Appeal herein and to submit such statements, documents and papers as may be considered necessary either at or be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in was from 2.80% to 10.84% and therefore it was stated that 10.79% of the margin falls in the range of the margin of comparable companies and hence this market support services income from associated enterprises is at arm s-length. 04. The learned transfer-pricing officer examines the various details and examined the comparability study raising an issue that why three different comparable companies were excluded despite having similar functions assets and risk. The assessee was also questioned why a set-off comparable companies as transfer pricing study report are included when those are not functionally comparable. Assessee objected to the same as per letter dated 19/7/2021. The same was considered by the learned transfer pricing offic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case on 1/8/2022 is barred by limitation. He submitted that the draft assessment order was passed on 23/9/2021. The learned dispute resolution issued directions on 14/6/2022. Therefore, the final order should have been passed within one month from the end of the month in which the directions is received by the learned assessing officer. Therefore, in the present case the order should have been passed on or before 31st of July 2022. The order has been passed on 1 August 2022 and digitally signed on 2 August 2022. Therefore, the assessment order passed on 1 August 2022 is barred by limitation. It was also shown that an email dated 14th June 22 was received by the assessee at 4.10 p.m. sent by the learned DRP through which it sent the directi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
