DCIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi V. GE Healthcare Pvt.Ltd.(now known as Wipro GE Healthcare P.Ltd.), Delhi

ITA 3726/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3830 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-10-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 17-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AGAINST DATED PASSED
• Keywords: Transfer pricing; International transaction
• Section: 92C; 92D

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 3726/DEL/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: C NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL ME MBER AND SH. PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUN TANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 3726/DEL/20 18 (A.Y 2010-11) (THROUGH VIDEO CON FERENCING) DCIT CIRCLE-10(1) NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) VS G E HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD. (KNOWN AS WIPRO GE HEALTHCARE P. LTD.) S-46, 1 ST FLOOR, JANTA MARKET, RAJOURI GARDEN, DELHI AAECA4311P (RESPONDENT) ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE OR DER DATED 28.02.2018 PASSED BY CIT (A)-44, NEW DELHI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE PENALTY AMOUNTING T O RS.1,25,51,429/- IMPOSED U/S 271G IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSE E FAILED TO FURNISH INFORMATION OR DOCUMENTS U/S 92D WITHIN STIPULATED TIME. 3. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WIPRO GE HEALTHCARE PVT. LT D. IS ENGAGED IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF IMAGING AGENTS AS WELL AS IN THE PR OVISION OF SUPPORT SERVICES. APPELLANT BY SH. VIVEK VARDHAN, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY NONE DATE OF HEARING 05.10.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 11.10.2021 2 ITA NO. 3726/DEL/2018 THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS INCOME TAX RETURN ON 8/10/20 10 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 4,92,63,279/-. IN THE TAX RETURN, THE ASSES SEE HAD SHOWN TAX LIABILITY OF RS. 1,77,29,321/-. THE ASSESSEE DEPOSITED ADDITIONS TAX OF RS. 94,00,000/- IS ASSESSMENT TAX OF RS. 81,88,360/- AND TAX WHICH HAS BEEN DEPOSITED AT SOURCE FOR RS. 1,40,964/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED T HE PENALTY U/S 271G OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, AMOUNTING TO RS.1,25,51,429/- VIDE ORDER DATED 30/7/2014. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE PENALTY ORDER, THE ASSESS EE FIELD BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE CIT(A) PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF TH E ASSESSEE. 4. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DE LETING THE PENALTY AMOUNTING TO RS.1,25,51,429/-IMPOSED U/S 271G IGNOR ING THE FACT THAT THE FAIL TO FURNISH INFORMATION OR DOCUMENTS U/S 92D WITHIN STIPULATED TIME. 5. AT THE TIME OF HEARING NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF O F THE ASSESSEE DESPITE GIVING NOTICE FOR THE DATE OF HEARING OF 5/10/2021 ON EARLIER OCCASION I.E. 27/7/2021 WHERE THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL APPEARED. T HEREFORE, WE ARE PROCEEDING ON THE BASIS OF THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE A SSESSEE MADE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS BEFORE THE CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE HEARD LD. DR AND PERUSED ALL THE RELEVAN T MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT THE CIT(A) H AS GIVEN A CATEGORICAL FINDING THAT THE ASSESSEE ATTENDED THE HEARINGS BEFORE THE TRANSFER PRICING OFFICE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND HAS FILED INFORMATION IN FORM 3CEB ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME. THE TRANSFER PRICING OFFICER HAS NOT MADE ANY TRANSFER PRICING ADJUSTMENT IN HIS ORDER U /S 92C A. THUS, THE TPO ACCEPTED THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASSE SSEE AT ARMS LENGTH. THE CIT(A) IN THE ORDER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE WHET HER RECEIVED THE NOTICE DATED 10/10/2012 OR NOT, CANNOT BE VERIFIED BECAUSE THE RECORDS BEYOND 60 DAYS CANNOT BE VERIFIED FROM POSTAL AUTHORITIES. B UT THERE IS A CLEAR FINDING 3 ITA NO. 3726/DEL/2018 THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE DOCUMENTS ON 15/4/2013 ONE DAY AFTER THE RECEIPT OF THE SECOND NOTICE DATED 15/4/2013. THUS, SECTIO N 271G WILL NOT APPLY IN THE PRESENT CASE AS THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE DOCU MENTS. THE CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A CATEGORICALLY FINDING AND THERE IS NO NEED TO INT ERFERE WITH THE SAME. HENCE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 5. IN RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 11 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021 SD/- SD/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (SUCH ITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER DATED: 11/10/2021 R. NAHEED * COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI 4 ITA NO. 3726/DEL/2018