TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (11) TMI 800
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in ITA No. 63(Asr)/2010 has raised following grounds of appeal: "1. That on the facts & circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in holding that alleged assessment framed is not barred by limitations. Limitation for deciding case for A.Y. 2005-06 expired on 31.12.2007. Alleged assessment framed on 31.12.2008 is barred by limitations and is void ab-initio. 2. That on the facts & circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming conclusion drawn by the A.O. without confronting the assessee that M/s. Global Hardware System USA is an associated enterprise of M/s. I.J. Tools and Castings (P) Ltd. Conclusion drawn by the ld. AO without confronting the assessee is void ab-initio. 3.&nbs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 8,00,000/- made by the AO invoking the provision of section 41(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 1a. While so holding the ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that there was sufficient material to establish that both creditors i.e. M/s. International Exports and M/s. Star Hardware Company were bogus and no liability existed on this account since the assessee had not been able to produce any bill in respect of any purchase made by the assessee from these concerns during the period relevant to the assessment year 2005-06. 2. It is prayed that the order of the ld. CIT(A) be set-aside and that of the A.O. restored." 4. The assessee in penalty appeal in ITA No. 65(Asr)/2012 has raised ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ific provisions for giving any opportunity to the assessee before reference to the TPO. It is for the AO when he considers it necessary or expedient so to do, he may refer the computation of arm's length price in relation to the said international transaction under section92C to the Transfer Pricing Officer. It was argued by Ld. DCIT (DR) Mr. Tarsem Lal that the Ld. counsel for the assessee, Mr. Surinder Mahajan, could not point out any specific mention in the statute. The legislature in its wisdom in the statute provides a specific mention when an opportunity of being heard is to be given to the assessee, which in the present case is not there. Therefore, the ld. DCIT(DR), Mr. Tarsem Lal, prayed to confirm the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from M/s. Bolten Steel Tube Co. Ltd; and M/s. Frost Fence Ltd. He has booked orders worth Rs. 292917 Canadian Dollars. Such statements are on record and therefore, the argument of the ld. DCIT (DR) Mr. Tarsem Lal that such persons have not booked the orders or have not worked for the assessee, cannot help the revenue. Similarly, Sh. Chand Shoor in his statement has admitted of looking after the sales promotion of M/s. Bani Exports and had experience of selling the goods in USA, UK, UAE and Saudi Arabia and he had gone abroad on behalf of the assessee to book the orders. He also stated that he has business connection and booked the orders from M/s. Mubarak AM-BA-Naeem, M/s. Abdullaha bin Omer and M/s. Osman Ahmad in UAE. Therefore, the argu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing order of the A.O. and no disallowance in this regard, in fact, should have been made by the AO. The Ld. CIT(A) had sustained 20% of the disallowance made by the AO which is also not justified. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, disallowance made by the AO is not justified and the order of the ld. CIT(A) in sustaining 20% disallowance is also reversed, as discussed hereinabove. Thus, ground Nos. 4 & 5 of the assessee are allowed. 11. Ground No. 6 & 7 are general in nature and do not required any adjudication. 12. As regards the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No. 84 (Asr) 2010, the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs. 3 lacs. 12.1 In the course of present appellate proceeding, the ld. counsel for the as....