9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 611X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Accountant Member 1. Aforesaid appeal by Revenue for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 arises out of the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-56 Mumbai [CIT(A)] dated 23/07/2019 which has deleted penalty of Rs. 111.82 Lacs as levied by learned Assessing Officer (AO) u/s. 271G vide order dated 29/07/2016. 2. The Ld. Sr. DR, drawing attention to the factual matrix, justified the penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t certain international transactions of sale and purchase with its Associated Enterprises (AE) during the year, the same were referred to Ld. Transfer Pricing Officer-2(1)(2), Mumbai (TPO) for determination of Arm's Length Price (ALP). The assessee had benchmarked the transactions using entity level TNMM method and claimed the transactions to be at Arm's Length. However, Ld. TPO sought seg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chmarked the same using TNMM method in its Transfer Pricing Study which has been accepted by Ld. TPO. The only basis of levying impugned penalty against the assessee is the fact that the assessee did not furnish segmental profitability under the two segments owing to inherent nature of assessee's business. However, it was practically difficult to maintain the details as called for by Ld. TPO. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctions in diamond industry, no penalty under Sec. 271G could justifiably be imposed for failure to furnish the said information. Similar is the view in DCIT Vs. Leo Schachter Diamonds India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 5931/Mum/2017 order dated 28/02/2019) which in turn, inter-alia, placed reliance on the decision rendered in DCIT Vs. Firestone International Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 5304/Mum/2016 dated 01/12/2018 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
