Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2011 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (1) TMI 875 - AT - Income TaxArm's length price - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Refrence to TPO - TNMM method - Non speaking order - The basis of addition to the returned income of the assessee is on account of difference in the arm's length price of transactions as declared by the assessee and as computed in order u/s 92CA(4) of the Act - The income computed as per the provisions of section 92CA of the Act is strongly based on the provisions of the Act and on settled principles of law by various judicial rulings Before DRP assessee had submitted the actual margin of the aforesaid companies along with their computations in the proceedings before the TPO, vide submissions dated 20.8.2009 (copy at APB 1, pages 181-200) - assessee claims that its transactions in its ITES segment were at arm's length on applying the wages/sales filter, or even without such application - The detailed objections raised by the assessee with regard to the adjustment made to its income from both its CSD as well as ITES segments have not been considered right from the very beginning, i.e., from the TPO to the DRP. This renders the Orders of the TPO and the AO to be non-speaking, so far as the objections raised by the assessee - in the case of Vodafone Essar Ltd. v. the Dispute Resolution Penal-II & Others", (2011 -TMI - 207599 - Delhi High Court), the jurisdictional High Court has held that it is obligatory for a judicial body like the Dispute Resolution Panel to pass a reasoned order - Appeal is allowed by way of remand to DRP
|