Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (12) TMI 732 - ITAT DELHIRectification of mistake - Penalty order u/s 271AA - company in Form No. 3CEB (Report from an accountant to be furnished u/s 92E relating to international transactions) has not disclosed these transactions, which it was required to disclose as per item no. 12 of the report - HELD THAT:- In penalty order u/s 271AA, the Assessing Officer specifically held that the information and documents required to be kept and maintained were not available with the assessee during the assessment proceedings and assessee kept on relying on the TP study of its Indian subsidiary, a separate legal entity. If the assessee as per the mandate of Section 92C would have maintained its own documents relating to the TP adjustment, the AO would have properly been able to determine ALP of the international transactions. But these facts were totally ignored by the CIT(A) and was not contested or disputed by the Assessee during the hearing before us in main appeal. Form 3CEB is to be furnished according to the provisions of Section 92E and for the documents maintained under Section 92D are different. Thus, the mere submission of Form 3CEB with accountant’s report will not be treated as documents submitted under Section 92D - As regards the case laws, the same were considered at the time of deciding the appeal, but the arguing counsel for the assessee at the time hearing of the main appeal has not categorically pointed out the supporting factual aspects to the present assessee’s case and to those cited case laws. In fact, all the case laws are on different factual aspect wherein the requisite documents were filed by those assesses, but that is not the case in present assessee. In case of Bebo Technologies [2013 (8) TMI 997 - ITAT CHANDIGARH] Tribunal deleted the penalty on the ground that show cause notice was not issued before passing the order under Section 271AA -Thus, at this juncture, the Ld. AR is seeking review of the order dated 13.10.2020 by the Tribunal without pointing out any mistake apparent on record as per Section 254 and therefore, the same is not permissible under the provisions of Income Tax Act A mistake apparent on the record must be an obvious and patent mistake and not something which can be established by a long-drawn process of reasoning on points which were not emerging from the original facts of the case. Thus, the assessee in the present Misc. Applications is seeking review of its own order by the Tribunal which is not permissible in law and hence dismissed.
|