MA NOS 6 AND 7 OF 2021 BIOGENEX LIFE SCIENCE P LT D CHERLAPALLY PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B BENCH, HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NOS. 6 & 7/HYD/2021 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS.519 & 696/HYD/2017) ASSESSMENT YEARS:2011-12 & 2012-13 M/S. BIOGENEX LIFE SCIENCES PRIVATE LTD, CHERLAPALLY PAN:AACCB6041P VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(2) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SRI P. MURALI MOHAN RAO REVENUE BY : SRI Y.V.S.T. SAI, CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING: 19/03/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 23/03/2021 ORDER PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. THESE M.AS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 254(2) OF THE I.T. ACT SEEKING RECTIFICATION OF THE ALLEGED MISTA KE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 4.11.2020 IN ITA NOS.519 & 696/H YD/2017. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT IN THE CAUSE TIT LE OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL ITA NO. FOR A.Y 2012-13 IS WRONGLY MENTIONED AS ITA NO.496/HYD/2017 INSTEAD OF ITA NO.696/HYD/2017. ON VERIFICATION OF THE FILES, WE FIND THAT THE CONTENT ION OF THE ASSESSEE IS CORRECT AND THEREFORE, ITA NO. FOR THE A.Y 2012- 13 SHALL BE READ AS ITA NO.696/HYD/2017 INSTEAD OF ITA NO.496/HYD/20 17. 2. THE SECOND MISTAKE POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE ASSESSEES APP EALS FOR THREE MA NOS 6 AND 7 OF 2021 BIOGENEX LIFE SCIENCE P LT D CHERLAPALLY PAGE 2 OF 3 YEARS I.E. A.YS 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 WERE HEA RD TOGETHER AS THE ISSUES IN ALL THE THREE AYS ARE SIMILAR AND COMMON AND THEREFORE, THE TRIBUNAL HAD REPRODUCED THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FOR THE A.Y 2010-11 AND THE FACTS OF THE CASE FOR A.Y 2 010-11 BUT WHILE DISPOSING OF THE APPEALS AT PARA NO.5, THERE IS NO MENTION OF THE APPEALS FOR THE A.YS 2011-12 AND 2012-13 THAT W HILE REMANDING THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO, THE RE IS NO MENTION OF THE APPEALS FOR THE A.Y 2011-12 AND 2012 -13 ALSO REMITTED. HE, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE ISSUES FOR THESE TWO YEARS ALSO MAY BE REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE AO. 3. THE LEARNED CIT (DR) HAD NO OBJECTION TO THE SAM E. THEREFORE, PARA NO.5 IS MODIFIED AS UNDER: 5. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE TPO HAS NOT ADOPTED ANY PARTICULAR METHOD FOR PROPOSING THE ADJUSTMENT TO THE ALP OF COMMISSION PAYMENT AND THE MANUFACTURING OF DIAGNOSTIC MACHINES. THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AGAINST THE NON-ADOPTION OF ANY METHOD FOR COMPUTING THE ALP. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMAND THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL FOR ALL THE THREE YEARS I.E. 2010 - 11 TO 2012-13 AND REMIT THE ABOVE ISSUES TO THE AO/TPO FOR DENOVO RECONSIDERATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 4. PARA NO.5 IS MODIFIED ACCORDINGLY AND TREATED AS PART OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 4.11.2020. M.AS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23 RD MARCH, 2021. SD/- SD/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 23 RD MARCH, 2021. VINODAN/SPS MA NOS 6 AND 7 OF 2021 BIOGENEX LIFE SCIENCE P LT D CHERLAPALLY PAGE 3 OF 3 COPY TO: 1 M/S.BIOGENEX LIFE SCIENCE (P) LTD C/O SHRI SURESH MUTHUKRISHNAN, C.A. 305, KALPAK ARCADE, NO.19 CHURC H STREET, BANGALORE 560001 2 DY.CIT, CIRCLE 1(2) HYDERABAD 3 DRP, 2 ND FLOOR, IT TOWERS, 10-2-3 AC GUARDS, HYDERABAD 5000 04 4 5 6 TPO/ADD.CIT, (TP) HYDERABAD 500004 CIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) IT TOWERS, 10-2-3 AC G UARDS HYDERABAD CIT-1, HYDERABAD 7 THE DR, ITAT HYDERABAD 8 GUARD FILE BY ORDER