9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 1358X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R For the Assessee : Shri Chavali Narayan, C.A For the Revenue : Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT (DR) ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present cross appeals has been filed by assessee as well as revenue against final assessment order dated 29/01/2016 passed by Ld. AO under section 143 (3) read with section 144C (13) of the Act, on following grounds of appeal: ITA No.584/Bang/2016 Based on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, NTT DATA Global Delivery Services Private Limited [successor of NTT DATA India Enterprise Application Services Private Limited] ('the Appellant") respectfully craves leave to prefer an appeal under section 253 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") against the order passed by the Depu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , in law and in facts, by determining the arm's length margin/ price using only FY 2010-11 data which was not available to the Appellant at the time of complying with the transfer pricing documentation requirements; 6. The learned AO! TPO erred, in law and in facts, by rejecting the supplementary/ alternate economic analysis using internal TNMM as submitted by the Appellant; 7. The learned AG! TPO erred in rejecting certain comparable companies by applying the following quantitative and qualitative filters: (a) The learned AO/ TPO erred, in law and in facts, by rejecting certain comparable companies identified by the Appellant for having different accounting year (i.e. companies having accounting year other than March 31 or com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... length price without giving benefit of +1- 5 percent under the proviso to section 920 of the Act; (III) Corporate tax grounds 13. Disallowance of interest and late payment fee of professional tax and service tax amounting to INR 22,750 and INR 226,302 respectively, totalling to INR 249,052 13.1. The learned AG has erred, in law and in facts, by disallowing the amount paid towards interest and late payment of professional tax and service tax amounting to INR 22,750 and INR 226,302 respectively, totalling to INR 249;052 by considering the same as penal in nature. 13.2. The learned AG has erred in law and facts by not appreciating the fact that such interest payments are compensatory in nature and not penal in nature. 14. Disal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce. (IV) Other grounds 16. The learned AO has erred in law and facts, in not granting deduction eligible under Chapter VI-A of the Act of INR 360,733 as claimed by the Appellant in its Return of Income. 17. The learned AO has erred in law and facts, by restricting credit towards tax deducted at source ('TDS") and advance tax to an aggregate amount of INR 58,999,914 as against INR 71 896,342 claimed by the Appellant in its Return of Income resulting into reduction of TDS and advance tax claim by INR 12,896,428. 18. The learned AO has erred in levying interest of INR 548,766 under section 234A of the Act, INR 15,914,214 under section 234B of the Act, INR 2,724,805 under section 234D of the Act and INR 829,108 under section 244 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted that assessee has sought to resolve transfer prising issues arising out of international transactions undertaken with U.S. associated enterprises vide MAP resolution entered between respective competent authorities dated 01/06/2020. Communication of resolution of dispute under MAP with USA is placed as Annexure 1 to letter dated 24/09/2020 filed by assessee before this Tribunal. Ld.AR submitted that, in view of MAP resolution, assessee wishes to withdraw ground of appeal 3-13, in appeal filed by assessee. In the light of above resolution agreed between competent authorities of USA and India, Ld.TPO/AO is directed to consider e transfer prising issue with US AE's in accordance with MAP resolution. Accordingly, we dismiss Grounds 3-13 ra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xport turnover from total turnover for computing deduction u/s 10A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 9. Further in respect of exclusion of loss earned from noneligible unit for computing profits of eligible unit under section 10 A, DRP relied on decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in case of and CIT v. Yokogava India Ltd. reported in [2012] 21 taxmann.com 154 10. We do not find any infirmity in view taken by DRP/AO as it is supported by ratios held by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. There is nothing on record brought by revenue to establish any distinguishing factors to deviate from ratio of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. Accordingly these grounds raised by revenue stands dismissed. In the result appeal filed by assessee stands ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
