Moser Baer India Ltd., New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5837/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 53239 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 08-12-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 21-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RA J TANDON
• Keywords: Transfer pricing
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH E DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI I. P. BANSAL, JM & SHRI K. D. RANJAN, AM I. T. APPEAL NO. 5837 (DEL) OF 2010. ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07. MOSER BAER INDIA LTD., ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, 43B, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, VS. C I R C L E : 5 (1), N E W D E L H I 110 020. N E W D E L H I. PAN / GIR NO. AAA CM 0322 J. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI AJAY VOHRA, ADV.; & SHRI NEERAJ JAIN, C. A.; DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI RAJ TANDON [CIT] D. R. ; O R D E R. PER K. D. RANJAN, AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 06-07 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 144-C OF THE ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN AS MANY AS 32 GROUNDS GRO UPED IN FIVE MAIN GROUNDS. THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN ALL THE GROUNDS RELATES TO TRANSFER PRI CING. THE FACTS OF THE CASE STATED IN BRIEF ARE TH AT THE ASSESSING OFFICER REFERRED THE MATTER TO TRANSF ER PRICING OFFICER [TPO] FOR DETERMINATION OF ARMS LENGTH PRICE IN RESPECT OF CERTAIN INTERNATION AL TRANSACTIONS. THE TPO PASSED ORDER UNDER SECTION 92-CA(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ON 15/ 10/2010. SUBSEQUENTLY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FRAMED DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTI ON 144-C ON 29 TH DECEMBER, 2009, WHICH WAS FORWARDED TO THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL [DRP] FOR THEIR APPROVAL. 2 I. T. APPEAL NO. 5837 (DEL) OF 2010. 3. BEFORE DRP THE ASSESSEE FILED OBJECTIONS UNDER S ECTION 144C(2)(B) OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF DRAFT ASSESSMENT SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. DRP AF TER GOING THROUGH THE DRAFT ASSESSMENT AND HEARING THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE OBJE CTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE, APPROVED THE DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER. 4. BEFORE US THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED DETAILED OBJECTIONS BEFORE THE DRP, BUT NONE OF THE OBJECTIO NS HAD BEEN CONSIDERED BY DRP. THE DRP HAS PASSED ONE LINE ORDER, CONFIRMING THE DRAFT ASS ESSMENT ORDER. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THAT NON-SPEAKING ORDER PASSED BY TH E DRP CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. CIT (DR) SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT DRP HAS PASSED NON-SPEAKING ORDER WITH OUT ANY DISCUSSION ON THE ISSUES INVOLVED. SUCH A NON-SPEAKING ORDER, WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE, CANNOT BE UPHELD. WE, THEREFORE, FEEL IT PROPER TO SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL WITH THE DIRECTIONS TO CONSIDER THE OBJECTION S RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE ISSUE BY PASSING A SPEAKING ORDER ON THE ISSUE. WE ORDER AC CORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON : 08 TH DECEMBER, 2011. SD/- SD/- [ I. P. BANSAL ] [ K. D. RANJAN ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 08 TH DECEMBER, 2011 . * MEHTA * 3 I. T. APPEAL NO. 5837 (DEL) OF 2010. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : - 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CIT, 4. CIT (APPEALS), 5. SR. DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT.