TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 500X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pany in its cross objections challenging the validity of the assessment. As this issue, which is being restored to the file of DRP, goes to the root of the matter, we keep the other issue raised by the assessee challenging the addition made on account of T.P. adjustment open with a liberty to the assessee to raise the same again if it fails to succeed on the preliminary issue before the DRP. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA.No.161/Hyd/2014 - - - Dated:- 11-3-2015 - SHRI P.M. JAGTAP AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JJ. For The Assessee : Mr. Kanchun Kaushal Mr. Abhiroop Bhargav For The Revenue : Smt. G. Aparna Rao ORDER PER P.M. JAGTAP, A.M. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icer, T.P. adjustments of ₹ 1.88 crores was worked by the TPO and accordingly, addition of ₹ 1.88 crores was proposed by the A.O. in the draft assessment order dated 28.10.2010. The assessee approached the DRP raising various objections in respect of the draft assessment order proposed by the A.O. One of such objections raised by the assessee was that in the absence of notice under section 143(2) served by the A.O. on it within the statutory time limit, the entire assessment proceedings were void abinitio. The DRP found this objection of the assessee to be sustainable and directed the A.O. to verify from the relevant record of the factual position as regards the service of notice under section 143(2). On verification, the A.O. a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t assessment order dated 28.02.2013 proposed by the A.O. objections were again filed by the assessee before the DRP challenging the validity of the re-assessment proceedings as well as disputing the additions proposed by the A.O. on merit. The DRP considered the objections of the assessee only in respect of additions proposed by the A.O. on merit and on such considerations, directed the A.O. not to make any addition on account of disallowance of assessee s claim of deduction under section 10A in respect of Pune as well as Bangalore unit. The objection of the assessee in respect of the addition of ₹ 1,90,97,042 on account of T.P. adjustment however was not found to be sustainable by the DRP. Pursuant to the directions given by the DRP ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice of notice under section 143(2) on the assessee within the statutory time limit, the reopening of assessment by the A.O. itself is invalid. In support of this contention, he has relied on the decision of the Pune Bench of ITAT in the case of Maximize Learning Private Limited vs. ACIT, Circle 11(2), Pune ITA.No.2234/PN/2012 dated 02.02.2015. Although, it appears from the said order of the Pune Bench of this Tribunal that a similar issue involving identical facts has been decided by the Tribunal in favour of the assessee, it is observed that the DRP in the case of the assessee has not decided this preliminary issue vide its order dated 21.11.2013 in spite of the fact that the same was specifically and separately raised by the assessee in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
