9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 1128X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and synthesis of chemical compounds and data processing. It filed its return of income on 30.11.2013 reporting a total income of Rs.13,89,39,620/-. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment through CASS for which statutory notices were issued and duly served on the assessee who complied with the same. The matter was referred to the Ld. Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) in respect of international transactions reported by the assessee in Form No. 3CEB. Based on the reference made by the Ld. TPO, arms length price (ALP) in respect of international transactions was determined by DCIT, TPO-II, Kolkata by passing an order u/s. 92CA(3) on 28.10.2016 with an upward adjustment to the total income by Rs.8,95,67,833/-. The said upward transfer pricing adjustment included amount of Rs.8,67,68,889/- for interest on loan and Rs.27,98,944/- in respect of guarantee fee on the loan guaranteed on behalf of the Associated Enterprises (AE). Apart from the said transfer pricing adjustment, Ld. AO made certain other disallowances and completed the assessment at total income of Rs.22,77,37,440/-. The assessment order went in appeal before the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Kolkata in ITA No. 2169/Kol/2017 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment order after considering the two issues raised by him in the revisionary proceedings. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. Before us, Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCA represented the assessee and Shri Amal Sudhir Kamat, CIT, DR represented the department. 7. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the second issue raised by the Ld. Pr. CIT in the impugned order u/s. 263 of the Act relating to transfer pricing adjustment for guarantee fee received by the assessee, the matter has already been dealt by the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Kolkata in assessee's own case for the same year in ITA No. 2169/Kol/2017 wherein the addition relating to transfer pricing adjustment made on account of receipt of guarantee fee charged to the AE was deleted and the appeal of the assessee was allowed vide order dated 15.03.2019. Accordingly, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that Ld. Pr. CIT had no jurisdiction to raise this issue in the revisionary proceedings when the higher wisdom has already dealt with it in favour of the assessee. 7.1. On the first issue relating to claim of depreciation, it was submitted by the Ld. Counsel that assessee had availed f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st for purchase of long term fixed assets was capitalized during the FY 2012-13. 19. Please furnish evidences regarding claim of depreciation & additional depreciation (for major items)." 8. Ld. Counsel submitted that against this query, all the details for the assets acquired and the long term foreign currency loss utilized for the acquisition of assets so also the phase wise exchange loss on long term foreign currency loans capitalized, fixed assets with bill wise details of assets added in the plant and machinery block, were all furnished which are placed in the paper book. Based on these submissions, Ld counsel strongly claimed that detailed enquiry and examination has been made by the Ld. AO in the course of assessment and the allegation by the Ld. Pr. CIT that the order is passed without making enquiries or verifications is baseless, devoid of any merits. He, thus submitted that the assessment order is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue and, therefore, the impugned order u/s. 263 of the Act ought to be quashed. 9. Per contra, Ld. CIT, DR placed reliance on the order of Ld. Pr. CIT and submitted that no prejudice is caused to the assessee since ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e provisions of section 43A of the Act, ld. AO did not make a separate addition while computing the assessed income of the assessee. Assessee had reiterated these facts before the Ld. PCIT in the revisionary proceedings also. Before us also, Ld. Counsel demonstrated the factual position by corroborative documentary evidences placed on record in the paper book as referred in the discussion and relevant charts reproduced above. Also, the second issue relating to ALP determination of receipt of guarantee fee by the assessee, the coordinate bench of ITAT Kolkata in the case of assessee itself for the very same year under consideration has held in its favor. 12. From the above factual matrix of the issue raised by the ld. PCIT, we find that he has not applied his mind to arrive at a consideration which is erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, for passing the impugned order u/s 263 of the Act. We observe that in the course of proceedings u/s 263 of the Act before the Ld. PCIT, assessee had furnished the relevant details and explained the issues raised through the show cause notice by the Ld. PCIT, supporting its contentions by corroborative documentary evide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
