Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
290620114 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
2 month(s) 16 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
19-08-2011
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
B
Next Hearing Date
17-08-2011
Assessment Year
2006-2007
Appeal Filed On
03-06-2011
Judgement Text
BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH B, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.2906/DEL.2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) CEVA FREIGHT INDIA PVT. LTD., VS. ADDL.CIT, RANGE 11, (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EGL EAGLE GLOBAL NEW DELHI. LOGISTICS (INDIA) PVT. LTD., 1 ST FLOOR, TOWER C, DLF BUILDING NO.10, DLF PHASE II, DLG CYBER CITY, GURGAON 122 002 (HARYANA). (PAN NO.AAACC2674H) (APELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI VARUN KHANNA & PUNEET CHUGH, C AS DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI KRISHNA, CIT DR & SHRI N.K. CH AND, SR.DR O R D E R PER B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE AO PASSED U/S 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 144C OF THE INC OME-TAX ACT, 1961 DATED 30.09.2010. 2. AT THE OUTSET OF THE HEARING, THE LEARNED AR SUB MITTED THAT WHILE MAKING THE ORDER U/S 144C OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT THE DRP HAS NOT CONSIDERED ALL THE OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSE E AND THE OBJECTIONS HAVE BEEN DISMISSED IN A SUMMARY MANNER. HE SUBMIT TED THAT THE ISSUES MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF DRP FOR RECONSI DERATION. HE ALSO ITA NO.2906/DEL/2011 2 SUBMITTED THAT THE ITAT MAY DIRECT THE DRP TO FINAL IZE THE PROCEEDINGS WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME. 3. LEARNED DR WAS ALSO NOT HAVING ANY OBJECTION TO THIS PROPOSITION. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED B ACK TO THE DRP WITHOUT STIPULATING ANY CONDITION OR OBSERVATION. LEARNED DR ALSO SUBMITTED THAT ITAT MAY GRANT AT LEAST ONE YEARS T IME FROM THE DATE OF SERVICE OF THE ORDER FOR FINALIZING THE ISSUE BY TH E DRP. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES ON THE ISSUE AND ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF DRP U/S 144C OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, WE FIN D THAT THE DRP HAS DEALT THE ISSUES AS UNDER :- WE HAVE GIVEN SERIOUS THOUGHT TO THE SUBMISSION FIELD BY THE AR FOR THE ASSESSEE. AR HAS PRESENTED BEFORE US A SEGEMENTAL ACCOUNT. THESE ARE NOT BEFORE TPO. THE KEYS OF ALLOCATION IS ALSO NOT CLEAR. THE APPORTIO NMENT OF COST OF SERVICES IS NOT VERIFIABLE. THE CHOICE OF COMPARABLES WAS AGITATED. INTERNAL TNMM WAS ALSO ARGUED BUT SEGEMENTAL ACCOUNTING IS NOT AS PER ACCO UNTING STANDARDS. CASE LAWS CITED BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN P ERUSED. THE ASSESSEES FACTS ARE QUITE DIFFERENT. ADDITION AL EVIDENCES HAS BEEN EXAMINED. IT IS SEEN THAT ASSES SEE IS AGGRIEVED ON ACCOUNT OF CERTAIN INCLUSIONS AND EXCL USIONS. ON THE PERUSAL OF TPO ORDER IT IS SEEN THAT OP/TC H AS BEEN CORRECTLY WORKED OUT. FOR THE ADDITION OF RS.33,23,41,378/-, NO DIRECTIONS ARE BEING ISSUED. ITA NO.2906/DEL/2011 3 SINCE BOTH THE SIDES AGREED FOR RESTORING THE ISSUE S TO THE FILE OF THE DRP WE RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE DRP AND WE ALSO AGREE WITH THE PROPOSITION OF THE LEARNED DR THAT THE MATTER MAY B E FINALIZED PREFERABLY WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF ORDER SERVED UPON. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 19 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2011. SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (B.C. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : THE 19 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2011 TS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.ADDL.CIT, RANGE 11, NEW DELHI 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR/ITAT
