9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1601X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act), 1961 is bad in law as clause (1) of section 92BA having been omitted by the Finance Act, 2017, the provisions of Chapter X of the Income Tax act were not applicable to the facts of the case and accordingly, the impugned assessment order has been passed without authority of law. 2. On the facts, in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Assessing Officer has erred in passing the impugned assessment order on the basis of order passed by the Learned Transfer Pricing Officer (Ld TPO), according to the directions issued by the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) on the basis of inconsistent and perverse finding and evaluation of facts. The Hon'ble DRP and the Ld TPO have fail ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... business of wholesale of trading activities of fabrics, grey fabrics, recycled polyester yarn and other allied textile products. 03. Assessee filed its return of income on 30th November, 2016 at Rs.10,39,500/-. As the assessee has entered into certain specified domestic transactions which were mentioned in form no. 3CEB, the learned Assessing Officer made a reference to the Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Transfer Pricing Officer, 1(1)(2), Mumbai for determination of Arms Length Price of such specified domestic transactions. The assessee has entered into international transactions of purchase of goods from its Associated Enterprises amounting to Rs.216,11,36,959/- which were benchmarked as Cost Plus Method. Before the learned Transfer Pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Arms Length Price of various transactions, certain directions were given. Based on these directions, the learned Transfer Pricing Officer retained the adjustment on purchase of goods at Rs.4,22,127/-, on payment of rent of Rs.75,360/- and on Directors' remuneration of Rs.50,60,880/-. Consequently, assessment order was passed at a total income of Rs.4,26,97,870/-. The assessee has preferred this appeal. 06. An adjournment request was received stating that the counsel of the assessee is busy in tax audit. We reject the adjournment petition for the reason that the issue in the appeal is covered in favour of assessee by the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court. 07. The learned Departmental Representative vehemently supported the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
