Teledata Marine Solutions Ltd., CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1283/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 73760 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 06-03-2014
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 07-06-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIRUDH RAI
• Assessee Lawyers: N R KRISHNAMOORTHY
• Keywords: Transfer pricing; International transaction; Revised return
• Section: 92E

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , ! , ' # $ BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER . / I.T.A. NO. 1283/MDS/2013 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 M/S.TELEDATA MARINE SOLUTIONS LTD., NO.37/1, TELEDATA TOWER, 1 ST FLOOR, VELACHERY TAMBARAM MAIN ROAD, VELACHERY, CHENNAI 600 042 [PAN: AACCT 5356 P] ( !% /APPELLANT) VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-III(1), CHENNAI 600 034 ( &'!% /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI N.R.KRISHNAMOORTHY, CA / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ANIRUDH RAI, CIT-DR / DATE OF HEARING : 06-03-2014 ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11-03-2014 #( / O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY, J.M: THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH A D ELAY OF 161 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AFFIDAVIT CITING REASONS FOR THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL. IN THE INTEREST OF JUST ICE, THE DELAY OF 161 DAYS IN FILING OF THE APPEAL IS CONDONED. THE APPE AL IS ADMITTED TO BE HEARD AND DISPOSED-OFF ON MERITS. I.T.A. NO. 1283/MDS/2013 2 2. IN APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS IMPUGNED THE ASSESSM ENT ORDER DATED 25-10-2012 PASSED U/S.143(3) R.W.S.92CA AND 1 44C(13) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREIN AFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT). THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MARINE SOFTWARE AND SHIP OPERATIONS. THE ASSESSEE FILED I TS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE AY.2008-09 ON 19-09-2008 DECLARING NIL INCOME. SUBSEQUENTLY, ASSESSEE FILED A REVISED RETURN OF IN COME ON 30-09- 2008 DECLARING ITS INCOME AS ` 4,15,77,140/-. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND NOTICE U/S. 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 31-08-2009. DURI NG THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OB SERVED THAT THERE WERE INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS AND AS SUCH R EFERRED THE MATTER TO TRANSFER PRICING OFFICER [TPO] TO ASCERTA IN THE ARMS LENGTH PRICE [ALP] IN RESPECT OF INTERNATIONAL TRAN SACTION. THE TPO VIDE ORDER DATED 28-10-2011, MADE UPWARD ADJUST MENT TO THE TUNE OF ` 111,34,21,533/- IN RESPECT OF INTERNATIONAL TRANSAC TIONS. THE TPO FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SUBMITTED THE REPORT IN FORM 3CEB IN RESPECT OF INTERNATIONAL TRA NSACTIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 92E OF TH E ACT. THE TPO ACCORDINGLY PROCEEDED WITH THE MATTER AND MADE ADJUSTMENTS ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION, WHATEVER AVAILABLE WIT H HIM. I.T.A. NO. 1283/MDS/2013 3 AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TPO, THE ASSESSE E FILED OBJECTIONS BEFORE THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL [DRP ]. REPEATED ADJOURNMENTS WERE TAKEN BY THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE B EFORE DRP. FINALLY, ON 31-08-2012, THE DRP DISMISSED THE OBJEC TIONS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. THE ASSESSING OFFICE R VIDE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 25-10-2012, CONFIRMED THE AD DITIONS MADE BY THE TPO. AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE AFORESAID ASSESSMENT ORDER, T HE ASSESSEE HAS COME IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBU NAL. 3. SHRI N.R.KRISHNAMOORTHY, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY IS IN FINANCIAL DISTRESS AND DUE TO TRANSITION IN THE COMPANY, THE CASE COULD NOT BE PROPERLY PURSUED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE LD.AR CONTENDED THAT ALL THE DOCUMENTS RELATING TO TRANSF ER PRICING STUDY ARE NOW AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME CA N BE PLACED ON RECORD, IF GIVEN A CHANCE AFRESH. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI ANIRUDH RAI, APPEARING O N BEHALF OF THE REVENUE VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD.DR SUBMITTED THAT AMPLE OPPORTUNITY WAS PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE AUTHORITIES BEL OW, BUT THE ASSESSEE CHOSE NOT TO PRESENT HIS CASE AND SUBMIT T HE RELEVANT I.T.A. NO. 1283/MDS/2013 4 DOCUMENTS AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. THE LD.DR STRON GLY SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND PRAYED FOR THE DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. BOTH SIDES HEARD. ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BEL OW PERUSED. WE OBSERVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN NEGLIGENT IN PURSUING HIS CASE BEFORE THE TPO AS WELL AS DRP. DESPITE REPEAT ED NOTICES, THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO SUBMIT REPORT AS ENVISAG ED U/S.92E OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY, WE REMIT THE FILE BACK TO ASSESSING OFFICER TO GRANT AN OPPO RTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR PLACING ON RECORD NECESSARY DOCUMENTS IN RESPECT OF INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES. THE A SSESSING OFFICER AFTER CONSIDERING THE SAME SHALL PROCEED IN ACCORDA NCE WITH LAW AND DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTI CAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON TUESDAY, THE 11 TH MARCH, 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) (VI KAS AWASTHY) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 11 TH MARCH, 2014 TNMM COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR