Visteon Asia Holdings Inc., CHENNAI V. DCIT, CHENNAI

MA 291/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5408 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 14-02-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 20-01-2017
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 21-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUPRIYO PAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K R SEKAR; S P CHIDAMBARAM S
• Keywords: Capital asset; Transfer pricing

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 291/MDS/2016 [ IN I.T.A. NO. 723/MDS/2016] ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 VISTEON ASIA HOLDINGS INC. ONE VILLAGE CENTRE DRIVE, VAN BUREN TOWNSHIP, C/O. DELOITTEE HASKINS & SELLS LLP 7 TH FLOOR, ASV N; RAMANA TOWERS, NO52, VENKATNARAYANA ROAD, T. NAGAR, CHENNAI 600 017 PAN: AACCV5647H V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION II(1), CHENNAI 34. ( APPLICANT) ( / RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI K.R. SEKAR & SHRI S.P. CHIDAMBARAM, ADVOCATES RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUPRIY O PAL, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 20.01.2017 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.02.2017 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE ASSESSEE FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETITI ON ON THE GROUND THAT THERE WAS AN ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 24.08.2016. 2 M.A. NO. 291/MDS/2016 2. SHRI SEKAR, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SU BMITTED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2007-08. HOWEVER, THIS TRIBUNAL INCORRECTLY REFERRED THE SUB JECT YEAR AND APPEAL AS ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 INSTEAD OF 2007-08. FIRST THE MISTAKE HAS OCCURRED AT PARA NO.9 AND 10. THE LD. COUNSEL FURT HER SUBMITTED THAT AS RIGHTLY OBSERVED BY THIS TRIBUNAL, IT WAS FOUND THA T COMPUTATION OF ARMS LENGTH PRICE SHALL BE MADE UNDER DCF METHOD. THE L D. COUNSEL FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS A CO-TRANSFERER OF VPSI SHARES AND THE SAID SHARES WERE SOLD ON THE SAME DAY ALONG WITH VI HI. THEREFORE, THE PRINCIPLE LAID DOWN BY THIS TRIBUNAL, IN THE CASE O F CO-SHARER IN THE VIHI WOULD BE EQUALLY APPLICABLE. HENCE, THERE IS AN ER ROR IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL. THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN VIHI IS AVAILABLE AT PAGE 63 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH WAS FILED IN THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, SHIR SUPRIYO PAL, THE LD. DEPAR TMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THIS TRIBUNAL AT PARA NO.8 REFERRED TO THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.17/MDS/2012 WHICH RELATES TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. HOWEVER, AT PARA NO.9 & 10, THE ERRO R CREPT IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL AND THE ASSESSMENT YEAR REFERRED AS 2 013-14. THEREFORE, IT NEEDS TO BE RECTIFIED. 3 M.A. NO. 291/MDS/2016 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EIT HER SIDE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ADMITTE DLY, THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.17/MDS/2012 RELATES TO THE ASSES SMENT YEAR 2007-08 AND NOT 2013-14. IT IS OBVIOUS FROM THE ORDER OF T HIS TRIBUNAL, THE QUOTE OF WHICH IS AVAILABLE AT PARA NO.3 AND ALSO REFEREN CE MADE BY THIS TRIBUNAL AT PARA NO.8. HENCE, THE ERROR NEEDS TO B E RECTIFIED. ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME IS RECTIFIED AS FOLLOWS: A) AT PAGE NO.6, PARA NO.9, THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE DELETED: THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION IS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 . INSTEAD OF THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE INSERTED: THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION IS FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2007-08. B). NOW COMING TO PARA NO.10 AT PAGE NO.7, THE FOLL OWING SHALL BE DELETED. THE VALUATION MADE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 IN RESPECT OF VIHI CANNOT BE ADOPTED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 WHEN THE AS SESSEE TRANSFERRED THE SAME. DUE TO TIME GAP, THE FLUCTUATION IN THE MARKET RATE AND VALUE OF CAPITAL ASSET OF THE COMPANY HAVE TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF VALUING THE SHARES UNDER DCF METHOD. THEREFORE, THE VALUATION MADE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 CANNOT BE THE SAME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. SINCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FOLLOWED DCF METHOD, THIS TRI BUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE CIT (APPEALS) HAS RIGHTLY CONFIRME D THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THIS TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO I NTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRM ED. 4 M.A. NO. 291/MDS/2016 INSTEAD THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE INSERTED: THE VALUATION MADE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 IN RESPECT OF VIHI HAS TO BE ADOPTED IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ALSO, SINCE THE ASSESSEE BEING A CO-TRANSFERER. THEREFORE, THE PRINCIPLE LA ID DOWN BY THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.17/MDS/2012 IS EQUALLY APPLICABLE FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AR E SET ASIDE AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO FOLLOW THE PRINCIP LE / DIRECTION GIVEN IN ITA NO.17/MDS/2012 IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ALSO. 5. THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN RESPECT OF OTHER M ATTER STANDS AS SUCH WITHOUT ANY CHANGE. 6. IN THE RESULT THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 14 TH FEBRUARY, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, /DATED, THE 14 TH FEBRUARY, 2017. JR. /COPY TO: 1. APPLICANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ( )/CIT(A)-16, CHENNAI 4. /CIT, 5. ! /DR 6. '#$ /GF.