TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 29/08/11 have not at all been considered. Furthermore, assessee’s grievance that the TPO without giving assessee opportunity has changed PLI from operating profit to sales to operating profit to cost also needs to be addressed by DRP - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 2103/Hyd/2011 - - - Dated:- 1-4-2015 - SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JJ. For The Assessee : Shri Girish Dave for The Revenue : Shri D. Sudhakar Rao ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against assessment order dated 10/12/2010 passed u/s 143(3) read with section 144C of the Act at the directions of Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP), Hyderabad pertaining to AY A.Y. 2007-08. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . He further noticed that as per the annual report, on net sales of ₹ 129.63 crores, assessee has incurred operating cost of ₹ 119.4 crores, which has resulted in operating profit of ₹ 10.09 crores on which the OP to sales works out to 7.78%. As is evident, the TPO did not accept assessee s TP study and accordingly rejected the same. After rejecting the TP study, TPO himself made analysis independently to determine ALP. In this process, after searching data bases, TPO selected eight comparables with average OP to sales of 17.47%. However, while computing arm s length margin, TPO applying the OP to cost ratio determined the ALP of the international transactions at ₹ 144.34 crores as against ₹ 127.61 crores. As a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as PLI that too without giving any opportunity of being heard to assessee on the issue. Ld. AR submitted, as assessee was not afforded opportunity by TPO and further assessee s submissions on merits as raised before DRP was not at all considered there is gross violation of rules of natural justice. Ld. AR therefore requested that the matter may be remitted to the DRP for deciding afresh after considering all the submissions of assessee as submitted in the written submissions filed on 29/08/11. 5. Ld. DR, though, raised a doubt whether assessee at all has filed any written submissions on 29/08/11 considering the fact that the last date of hearing before the DRP was 09/08/2011, but, he nevertheless submitted, department has no objection i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
