TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 713X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her directed that the claim of the assessee for deduction in the subsequent year be examined as per law. We find no reason to adjudicate on the controversy regarding determination of the arm's length price at nil, since it would make no difference to the assessed income, inasmuch as, the said expenditure is otherwise disallowable under section 40(a)(i) of the Act even going by the stand of the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes only. Disallowance under section 14A - investment made as a strategic investment in group companies - Held that:- The short point raised by the assessee is based on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Dish TV India Ltd. vs. ACIT [2016 (12) TMI 1544 - ITAT MUMBAI] whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... doing so are wrong, contrary to the facts of the case and against the provisions of law. (ii) The CIT (A) erred in law and facts in upholding order of Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO)/AO treating reimbursement of expenses as payment for services rendered by AE. The reasons given by him for doing so are wrong, contrary to the facts of the case and against the provisions of law. (iii) The CIT (A) Ld. ought to have held that there is no need to find ALP of reimbursement of expenses as there is no income content and it has not resulted into any direct or tangible benefit to the assessee. (iv) Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. CIT (A) ought to allowed deduction of 5% from arm's length price under proviso to section 92C(2) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee had neither proved that such services were essential for its business nor that any services had indeed been rendered by the associated enterprise. Considering that assessee was not able to prove that the services have resulted into any direct or intangible benefit, the Transfer Pricing Officer concluded that there was no need to find the arm s length value of such transaction. The Transfer Pricing Officer proceed to determine the arm's length price at nil vide his order dated 27/10/2011 passed under section 92CA(3) of the Act. The Assessing Officer passed the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act by adding a sum of ₹ 2,26,10,000/- to the returned income in conformity with the order passed by the Transfer Pricin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer is concerned, the only plea raised before us is that in the subsequent year assessee has deducted the requisite tax at source and, therefore, such sum would become allowable in the subsequent year. In this back ground, the Ld. Representative for the assessee submitted that the assessee has no objection if the invoking of section 40(a)(i) of the Act by the Assessing Officer is upheld in this year, but he contended that the Assessing Officer be directed to verify the subsequent deduction of tax at source and accordingly allow deduction in the subsequent year. 5. The Ld. Departmental Representative has relied upon the orders of the authorities below in support of the case of the Revenue. So however, with regard to the plea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssing Officer computed the disallowance under section 14A of the Act by applying Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962( in short the Rules ) at ₹ 12,02,115/-. The said action has also been affirmed by the CIT(A). 8. Before us, the short point raised by the assessee is based on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Dish TV India Ltd. vs. ACIT, ITA Nos.2066 2067/M/2015, A.Y 2008-09 2009-10 dated 20/12/2016, whereby it is canvassed that disallowance be recomputed by excluding the Strategic Investments made by the assessee in its subsidiaries. On this aspect, the Ld. Departmental Representative had no objection and accordingly, the matter is restored back to the file of Assessing Officer to re-work the amount disa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
