Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 290 - ITAT MUMBAIPenalty u/s 271G - assessee was unable to submit internal TNMM by working out the profitability of AE and non-AE segment - assessee failed to maintain documentation as required under Clause (g) and (h) of Rule 10D (1) - TPO accepted the transactions to be at Arm’s Length Price - HELD THAT:- due to peculiar nature of the product and constant mixing and re-mixing of diamonds obtained from AEs and non-AEs, it would not be feasible to maintain records to determine segmental profitability to work out internal TNMM. The undisputed position that emerges is that the assessee has carried out certain international transactions during the year with its AE and benchmarked the same using TNMM method in its Transfer Pricing Study which has been accepted by Ld. TPO. The only basis of levying impugned penalty against the assessee is the fact that the assessee did not furnish internal TNMM by providing segmental profitability of AE and non-AE transactions. The same stood explained by the inherent nature of business being carried out by the assessee which has already been enumerated by us in the preceding paragraphs. The Ld. first appellate authority, while deleting the penalty, relied upon the binding judicial decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in CIT Vs. M/s. Leroy Somer & Controls (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2013 (9) TMI 761 - DELHI HIGH COURT] and other decision of the Tribunal rendered on similar factual matrix. We also find that similar factual matrix stood covered in assessee’s case by the recent decision of coordinate bench of this Tribunal rendered in DCIT V/s Leo Schachter Diamonds India Pvt. Ltd [2019 (3) TMI 690 - ITAT MUMBAI] - no infirmity in the impugned order in deleting the penalty u/s 271G. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|