TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (5) TMI 2175
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that the AO was not justified in invoking provisions of section 10A(7) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to delete the addition made u/s. 10A(7) of the I.T. Act, 1961 of Rs.2,88,69,742/- 3. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the above grounds of appeal." 3. The Revenue is in appeal against the order of CIT(A) in holding that the Assessing Officer was not justified in invoking provisions of section 10A(7) of the Act and to delete the addition of Rs.2,88,69,742/-. 4. Briefly in the facts of the case, the assessee was a joint venture Company between....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fit worked out at Rs.2,88,69,742/- was added back to the total income of the assessee; in turn, disallowing the excess claim of deduction under section 10A of the Act, the Assessing Officer passed order under section 143(3) r.w.s 144C(13) of the Act. 5. Before CIT(A), the assessee pleaded that the course of business between assessee and group company/AEs was not so arranged as covered under section 10A(7) r.w.s. 80IA(10) of the Act. It was further pointed out that assessee had not earned more than ordinary profits and the margin shown by comparables could not be bench-marked for ordinary profits as per section 10A(7) of the Act. It was further pointed out by the assessee that provisions of section 10A(7) r.w.s. 80IA(10) of the Act were not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....80IA(10) of the Act. The assessee had entered into various international transactions with its related concerns/AEs. The transfer pricing issue was referred by the Assessing Officer to TPO who accepted the margins shown by assessee @ 29.14% to be at arm's length. The Assessing Officer held that ordinary profits as per transfer pricing report was @ 12.55% as against 29.14% shown by the assessee. No adjustment on account of arm's length price was proposed by the TPO. However, the TPO requested the Assessing Officer to verify the feasibility of disallowance under section 10A (7) r.w.s 80IA(10) of the Act on the surmise that the assessee had earned higher margins than the mean margins earned by comparables selected by assessee. Accordingly, ded....