9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 1543X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sued by Dispute Resolution Panel 1, [hereinafter referred to as "the DRP"] under Section 144C(5) of the Act. 2. When the matter was taken for hearing, the Ld. Authorised Representative advanced arguments on pressed into service for the Appellant referred to Ground 2 of appeal which read as under: "Validity of transfer pricing order passed by the learned TPO "2. Erred in not appreciating that the order passed by the Learned TPO on 1 November 2019 is time barred and bad in law, since Section 92CA(3A) of the Act requires the transfer pricing order to be passed "at any time before sixty days prior to "the timeline for the assessment order, it is implied that such order must precede 31 December by not less than sixty days." 3. Learned Au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o section 92CA has been inserted w.e.f. 01.06.2007 providing time limit for the Transfer Pricing Officer to pass the order i.e. within a period of 60 days prior to the date of completion of assessment as per section 153. So, under section 92CA (3A) read with section 153, Ld. TPO was required to pass the order within the period of 60 days prior to the date on which the period of limitation referred to in section 153 expires i.e. 21 months. 13. Undisputedly the assessment order was passed on 01.11.2019 whereas the Ld. TPO was required to pass the order within 60 days prior to the date of which period of limitation referred to in section 153 of the Act expires. 14. Now the question arises as to how the period of 60 days prior to the date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Board, in the Central Action Plan also indicates the dale by which the Transfer Pricing orders are to be passed as 31.10.2019. The impugned orders are thus, held to be barred by limitation." 15. Identical issue has been decided by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in case of ECL Finance Ltd. vs. ACIT in ITA No. 899/M/2018 order dated 22.09.2021 and in case of Louis Dreyfus Commodities India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 2381/Del/2014 order dated 11.03.2021 in favour of the assessee by following M/s. Pfizer Healthcare India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) case rendered by Hon'ble Madras High Court. 16. In view of what has been discussed above and following the order passed by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in case of M/s. Pf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing Officer on 01.11.2019 is barred by limitation and therefore, the transfer pricing adjustments made in the Final Assessment Order, dated 29.04.2021 are deleted. Ground No. 2 raised by the Appellant in the present appeal is, therefore, allowed. 6. In view of the above, Ground No. 3 to 18 and 21 pertaining to the transfer pricing issues raised in the appeal are disposed of as infructuous. Ground No. 19 pertaining to interest under Section 234B is disposed of as being consequential, while Ground No. 20 pertaining to claim of deduction in respect of education cess under Section 37(1) of the Act is disposed of as being not pressed on the basis of statement made by the Ld. Authorised Representative for the Appellant during ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
