Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 1536 - AT - Income TaxTP Adjustment - selection of comparable - functional dissimilarity - HELD THAT:- Dynalog India Ltd. - the company, which is in the manufacturing, assembling and servicing and software, as is evident from the website of Dynalog India Ltd., cannot be a good comparable to the assessee. We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that there is no infirmity in the finding of the learned DR that the Dynalog is not a good comparable to the assessee and the same is liable to be excluded. We accordingly, confirm the finding of the learned DRP in respect of Dynalog India Ltd. Bose Corporation India P. Ltd. - profit and loss account of Bose Corporation is not available either to the revenue or to the assessee. Further, it is also an admitted fact that the Bose Corporation is engaged in trading of high end audio system direct to the consumer whereas the assessee is dealing in the industrial goods as per trade policy. Not in dispute that the Bose Corporation is in the business of customer sales whereas the assessee is in the business to business sales. Bose Corporation trades in the direct consumer audio systems whereas the assessee has been dealing with the industrial goods business to business, thus exclude the Bose Corporation from the list of comparables for benchmarking the international transactions. Disallowance u/s 14A - suo moto disallowance by assessee - as contended by the assessee that Section 14A is applicable only when the exempt income is actually received or receivable during the assessment year but not on the notional income and that the value of investment which have yielded exempt income has to be separately carved out from other investment which has not yielded any income - HELD THAT:- It is an admitted fact that the assessee themselves disallowed a sum of ₹ 3,03,958/-. There is no dispute on the contention of the assessee that except BSL Dynamic Bond Retail, all other investments are taxable. Further, it also remains to be an admitted fact that similar additions made in earlier years is deleted by the ld. CIT(A) and no further appeal to the ITAT was preferred by the Department. In these circumstances, we find that the directions of the DRP for deletion of this addition is in consonance with the ratio laid down in the case of Radhasoami Satsang, [1991 (11) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT] which is to the effect that when the fundamental facts relating to a particular addition or deletion are permeating through several years, the department is not justified in taking inconsistent stands for different years. Rule 8D - CBDT circular No.5 of 2013 dated 11.2.2014, on which Ld. AO placed reliance in his order - As brought to our notice that in PCIT vs IL&FS Energy Development Co. Ltd. [2017 (8) TMI 732 - DELHI HIGH COURT] the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court quashed the same. In view of the same, we do not find any merit in Ground which is liable to dismissed and is dismissed as such.
|