Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (3) TMI 211 - AT - Income TaxDetermination of Arm’s Length Price (ALP) for Management Support Services - Held that:- Determination of ALP for Management Support Services at Rs. NIL is unwarranted and accordingly the upward adjustment made by the ld TPO in the sum of ₹ 339,17,83,606/- is deleted. Determination of Arm’s Length Price (ALP) for AMP expenses - Held that:- We find that the ld TPO, ld AO and the ld DRP had categorically accepted the basic fact that the assessee is a manufacturer and also engaged in distribution of products. While this is so, we are not able to comprehend the argument advanced by the ld DR that assessee is only a distributor and thereby the decision of Sony Ericsson would apply to the case. We find that since the assessee is a manufacturer cum distributor as accepted by the lower authorities, the decision rendered in Maruti Suzuki (2015 (12) TMI 634 - DELHI HIGH COURT) would be applicable to the assessee’s case, since the contention of the ld DR that assessee is only distributor, is not emanating from the records of the lower authorities. We find that the issue under dispute before us is squarely addressed by this tribunal in assessee’s own case for the Asst Year 2011-12 thus the upward adjustment made by the ld TPO and upheld by the ld DRP in the sum of ₹ 1,03,59,000/- is hereby directed to be deleted. Lease rental paid for motor car taken on finance lease - Held that:- We find that the issue under dispute is covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd. (2013 (1) TMI 344 - SUPREME COURT) in favour of the assessee Depreciation on moulds - Held that:- AR stated that the moulds were owned by the assessee and used for the purpose of its business. Further, the moulds were exclusively used in the plastic factory by the job workers/co-makers to whom moulds were given by the assessee to be used in the plastic factory, under its control and supervision and prayed that depreciation @ 30% would be eligible on the said moulds. We find that this issue has been considered by this tribunal in assessee’s own case for the Asst Year 2011-12 as held AR has just verbally submitted that in most of the products which appears to be true. But as such no documentary evidence was filed in support of the assessee’s claim. However in the interest of justice and fair play, we are inclines to restore this matter to the file of AO for fresh adjudication in accordance with the law. espectfully following the aforesaid judicial precedent, we restore this matter to the file of the ld AO for fresh adjudication Non grant of deduction u/s 80G - Held that:- We find that there is no discussion in the assessment order regarding this and hence we deem it fit and appropriate to restore this issue to the file of the ld AO to verify the claim of deduction u/s 80G of the Act with the receipts and other relevant documents to be produced by the assessee before the ld AO. Accordingly, the Ground No. 9 raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Short deduction of tds - Held that:- Since the issue involves only verification of certificates/Form 26AS, as the case may be, we hereby direct the ld AO to kindly verify the necessary evidences in this regard and grant TDS credit, if eligible, to the assessee
|