TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1393X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Additional evidence was allowed to be brought on record. Thereafter the choice before the Tribunal was either to ask the Assessing Officer to take such additional evidence into account and re- decide the issue or to do itself. Unfortunately, the Tribunal did neither. Tribunal disposed of the Petitioner's Appeal without giving any answer to the Petitioner's challenge to the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The power of rectification of the Tribunal flowing from section 254(2), howsoever, restricted, would definitely be available in a situation like the present one. When the Appellant before the Tribunal raises a ground, presses the ground in service, it is the duty of the Tribunal to dispose of such ground and give its opi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Adjustment amt. Provision of application engineering services Rs.78,71,426/ Payment of 'Corporate fees' Rs.4,88,96,708/ 3. In terms of order of Transfer Pricing Officer, the Assessing Officer passed a draft order on 01/03/2016 incorporating the above Transfer Pricing Adjustments. Against such draft order, the Petitioner approached the Dispute Resolution Panel (for shot 'DRP'). The DRP passed order dated 09/09/2016 upholding both the adjustments. The Assessing Officer thereupon passed the order of assessment on 30/11/2016 which obviously contained both the Transfer Pricing Adjus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lls under the realm of reconsideration of the Tribunal's order, which, within the jurisdiction of rectification, cannot be done. 6. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. Petition is strongly opposed by learned Counsel Mr. Suresh Kumar. He supported the order passed by the Tribunal contending that the powers of rectification are limited. In exercise of such powers, the Tribunal cannot review its own decision. 7. In our opinion, however, this was a fit case where the Tribunal ought to have exercised the rectification powers. We may recall that, before the Tribunal the assessee had raised specific ground to challenge the addition of ₹ 4,88,96,708/ . In fact, this was the substantial part of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
