Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore V. M/s adcock Ingram Limited , Bangalore

MA 22/BANG/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5559 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 17-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 18-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR P V PRADEEP KUMAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI LALIET KUMAR , JUDICIAL MEMBER MP NO.22/BANG/2019 (IN IT(TP)A NO.2728/BANG/2017) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 13 - 1 4 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(1), BANGALORE. VS. M/S. ADCOCK INGRAM LIMITED, NO.49C & D, BOMMASANDRA INDL. AREA, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE-560 099. PAN AAGCA 4343M APPELLANT RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : DR. P. V. PRADEEP KUMAR, ADDL. CIT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI. BHARATH L, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 1 7 . 0 5 .201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17 . 0 5 .201 9 O R D E R PER JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION (M.P.) FILED BY REVENUE IS IN RESPECT OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER IN IT(TP)A NO. 2728/BANG/2017 DATED 14.09.2018 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2.1 THE GROUNDS RAISED BY REVENUE IN THIS MP ARE AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE HON'BLE ITAT NEEDS TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE DECISION OF THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH OF THE ITAT, BENGALURU, IN THE CASE OF VOLVO INDIA PVT LTD VS CIT(A), LTU, BANGALORE, IN IT(TP)A N6.384/BANG/2013, DATED 16.12.2016 WHILE DECIDING THE ISSUE OF M.P. NO. 22/BANG/2019 (IN IT(TP)A NO.2728/BANG/2017) PAGE 2 OF 3 ALP ADJUSTMENT MADE BY THE TPO IN RESPECT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES FEE AND LICENSE FEE PAID BY THE ASSESSEE. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE HON'BLE ITAT IN HOLDING THAT THE TPO CANNOT HOLD THE ALP AS 'NIL' WITHOUT APPLYING ONE OF THE PRESCRIBED METHODS FOR CALCULATING THE ALP, NEEDS TO CONSIDER THE SAME IN THE LIGHT OF DECISION OF THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH OF THE ITAT, BENGALURU, IN THE CASE OF VOLVO INDIA PVT LTD VS CIT(A), LTU, BANGALORE (SUPRA). 2.2 WE HAVE HEARD AND CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD WITH REGARD TO REVENUES CONTENTIONS IN THIS MP THAT THE TRIBUNAL NEEDS TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE DECISION OF ANOTHER BENCH OF ITAT BANGALORE IN THE CASE OF VOLVO INDIA PVT. LTD., VS. CIT(A) IN IT(TP)A NO.384/BANG/2013 DATED 16.12.2016 WHILE DECIDING THE ISSUE OF ALP ADJUSTMENT MADE BY THE TPO IN RESPECT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES FEES AND LICENCE FEE PAID BY THE ASSESSEE. 2.3 WHILE DECIDING THIS ISSUE, THE TRIBUNAL IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 14.09.2018 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14, AT PARA 5.4.1 THEREOF, FOLLOWED THE ORDER OF A CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 AND 2010-11 IN IT(TP)A NO.1039 AND 1078/BANG/2015 DATED 31.01.2018, WHEREIN THE DECISION OF THE ITAT BANGALORE BENCH IN THE CASE OF VOLVO INDIA PVT. LTD., VS. CIT(A) IN IT(TP)A NO.384/BANG/2013 DATED 16.12.2016 WAS CONSIDERED WHILE DECIDING THE ISSUE OF ALP ADJUSTMENT PROPOSED BY THE TPO IN RESPECT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES FEES AND LICENCE FEES PAID BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO MERIT IN REVENUES CONTENTIONS IN THIS MP AS IT IS AMPLY CLEAR THAT THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF VOLVO INDIA PVT. LTD., (SUPRA) WAS CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DECIDING THIS VERY ISSUE IN THE CASE ON HAND IN THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 AND 2010-11 ALSO. ON A PERUSAL OF THIS CASE CITED BY REVENUE (SUPRA), WE FIND THAT IT IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE CASE ON HAND AS THE FACTS THEREOF ARE DIFFERENT; AS IT WAS NEVER THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THESE TRANSACTIONS ARE CLOSELY LINKED WITH THE OTHER TRANSACTIONS AND THEREFORE THE SUBMISSION THAT THESE TRANSACTIONS SHOULD BE BUNDLED M.P. NO. 22/BANG/2019 (IN IT(TP)A NO.2728/BANG/2017) PAGE 3 OF 3 WITH OTHER TRANSACTIONS WAS NOT ACCEPTED. FINDING NO MERIT IN THE AVERMENTS PUT FORTH BY REVENUE, WE DISMISS THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THIS MP. 2.4 WE ALSO OBSERVE THAT REVENUE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO ESTABLISH BEFORE US THAT IT HAD FILED ANY APPEALS OR MPS AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 AND 2010-11 IN IT(TP)A NO.1039 AND 1078/BANG/2015 DATED 30.01.2018 ON THIS ISSUE; WHICH WAS FOLLOWED BY TRIBUNAL IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 3. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 17 TH DAY OF MAY, 2019. SD/- SD/- BANGALORE. DATED: 17 TH MAY, 2019. /NS/* COPY TO: 1. APPELLANTS 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE. ( LALIET KUMAR ) ( JASON P BOAZ ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER