9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 217X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "D" Bench, Ahmedabad (for short "the Tribunal"), in Misc. Application No. 85/Ahd/2023 in IT(TP)A No. 930/Ahd/2015 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 3. The brief facts of the case can be summarized as under:- 3.1 The respondent filed the return of income on 12.10.2010 declaring total income of Rs. 32,83,18,600/- for the Assessment Year 2009-10. 3.2 The case of the petitioner was selected for scrutiny and the notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act was issued on 24.08.2011. 3.3 The Assessing Officer made reference under Section 92CA (1) of the Act to the Transfer Pricing Officer for computation of Arm's Length Price (ALP) in relation to the international transactions of the Respondent-Assessee. 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t -Assessee. 3.8. The Tribunal by the impugned Order dated 24.01.2024 allowed the Misc. Application filed by the Respondent-Assessee by recalling its order dated 31.05.2023 passed in IT(TP)A No.930 of 2015 for the limited purpose of re-adjudicating Ground No.4 with regard to the Transfer Pricing Adjustment in relation to the international transaction of payment of guarantee fees by the Respondent-Assessee to the Associated Enterprise. 4. Being aggrieved by the order dated 24.01.2024 passed by the Tribunal, allowing the Misc. Application filed by the Respondent-Assessee, the Petitioner-Revenue has preferred this petition for quashing and setting aside the same. 5. Learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Varun Patel for the petitioner submitte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the decision of the Apex Court in the case of the Commissioner of Income-tax (IT-4), Mumbai Vs. Reliance Telecom Ltd. reported in [2022] 440 ITR 1 (SC). 5.2 It was submitted that, in similar facts, the Hon'ble Apex Court has allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue, setting aside the Order passed by the High Court confirming the Rectification Order passed by the Tribunal holding that the Tribunal was not justified in exercising the power under Section 254 (2) of the Act by re-visiting its original order and go in details on merits and thereafter recall its Order. It was therefore submitted that merely because it was pointed out before the Tribunal that the order in the earlier year in the case of the Assessee was not considered by the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal filed by the Revenue arising from the Order of the Tribunal for the earlier Assessment Year 2009-10 has approved the findings of the Tribunal as under:- "7. Now so far as the proposed Question (C), i.e. deleting the addition made on account of Transfer Pricing Adjustment of Rs. 23,51,667/- is concerned, apart from the fact that in the case of the very assess in earlier year, similar addition was deleted, even on merits also, the learned ITAT has observed as under:- "17. There is no dispute that all the three entities that is the assessee company, the lender company and the guarantor company are Associated Enterprises. There is also on dispute that the assessee has borrowed the money on interest of 12.25% per annum as against int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
