Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1928 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
3 year(s) 1 month(s) 10 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
28-06-2019
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
Not Allotted
Assessment Year
2011-2012
Appeal Filed On
18-05-2016
Judgement Text
, D IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . / I.T.A. NO. 1326/AHD/2016 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) ERHARDT + LEIMER (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED SURVEY NO. 252/1 & 2, NEAR ARVEE DENIM, SARKHEJ- BAVLA HIGHWAY, VILLAGE SARI, AHMEDABAD - 382415 / VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAACE2657G ( APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI T. P. HEMANI, A.R. / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAJESH MEENA, SR.D.R. DATE OF HEARING 27/06/2019 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 28/06/2019 / O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, AHMEDABAD, (CIT(A) IN SHORT), DATED 22.03.2016 ARISING IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 02.02.2015 PA SSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) UNDER S. 143(3) OF THE INCOM E TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT) CONCERNING AY 2011-12. ITA NO. 1326/AHD/16 [ERHARDT + LEIMER (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VS. DCIT] A.Y. 2011-12 - 2 - 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY ASSESSEE READ HE REUNDER: 1.1 IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, AHMEDABAD GROSSLY ERRED IN RETAINING/CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWA NCE OF MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UPWARD ADJUSTMENT IN RESPECT O F TRANSACTIONS WITH ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISES. 1.2 IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS}-2, AHMEDABAD GROSSLY ERRED IN RETAINING/CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWA NCE BY ADOPTING THE AMOUNT OF DISCOUNT ALLOWED IN BULK PURCHASES AT 5% AS AGAINST THE APPELLANT'S CLAIM THAT SUCH DISCOUNT AMOUNTED T O 15%. IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT WHILE DETERMINING THE A RM LENGTH PRICE COMPUTED UNDER COMPARABLE UNCONTROLLED PRICE METHOD IN RESPECT OF SALE OF CLOTH GUIDER, THE ADJUSTMENT IN RESPECT OF DISCOUNT ON BULK VOLUME PURCHASES BE ALLOWED/GRANTED AT 15% AS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT AGAINST 5% ADOPTED BY THE LEARNED CIT (A) . 1.3 IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE TRANSACTIONS OF SALE O F CLOTH GUIDERS MADE BY THE COMPANY WITH ITS AE HAVE BEEN MADE AT A LP COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REGULATIONS PROVIDED IN THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 READ WITH APPLICABLE RULES AS PROVIDED IN THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 AND THEREFORE, THE ADJUSTMENT OF RS.19,03,590/ - WHICH WAS WRONGLY MADE BY THE AO AND CONFIRMED/RETAINED BY TH E CIT(A) IS REQUIRED TO BE DELETED TO THE EXTENT MENTIONED IN 1 .2 ABOVE. IT IS THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE ADDITION/DISALLOWANCE RE TAINED/CONFIRMED BY THE CIT (A) MAY PLEASE BE DELETED.' 3. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, THE LEAR NED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IDENTICAL ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN AY 2010-1 1 AS WELL. THE ITAT IN AY 2010-11 IN ITA NO. 352/AHD/2015 ORDER DA TED 06.02.2017 HAS SET ASIDE ALL THE ISSUES INVOLVED BA CK TO THE FILE OF THE TRANSFER PRICING OFFICER (TPO). 4. THERE BEING NO DISPARITY IN FACTS POINTED OUT EI THER ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE OR ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE, WE FOLLOW THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN AY 2010-11 AND RESTORE THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL T O THE TPO IN PARITY ITA NO. 1326/AHD/16 [ERHARDT + LEIMER (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VS. DCIT] A.Y. 2011-12 - 3 - FOR DECIDING AFRESH ACCORDING TO THE DIRECTIONS ISS UED BY THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH OF ITAT IN AY 2010-11 WHICH IN TURN HAS RELIED UPON THE DECISION IN AY 2007-08 & 2008-09 THEREIN. 5. THE TPO SHALL AFFORD ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEA RING TO THE ASSESSEE TO EVALUATE THE POSSIBILITY OF APPROPRIATE ADJUSTMENTS, IF ANY, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (PRADIP K UMAR KEDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 28/06/2019 TRUE COPY S. K. SINHA !'#' / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- &. / REVENUE 2. / ASSESSEE (. )*+ , / CONCERNED CIT 4. ,- / CIT (A) /. 012 33*+4 *+#4 56) / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 7. 289 : / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / 4 /5 *+#4 56) THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 28/06/201 9
Mehul