M/s Talisma Corporation Pvt Ltd , Bangalore V. Deputy Commissioner of INCome TAX Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

MA 49/BANG/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2945 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 14-07-2022
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 16-06-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Transfer pricing; International transaction
• Section: 13

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. No. 49/Bang/2022 (in IT(TP)A No. 2499/Bang/2017) Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/s. Talisma Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 3 rd Floor, Olympia Building, Bagmane Tech Park, C V Raman Nagar, Byrasandra Post, Bangalore – 560 093. PAN: AABCT1052F Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7 (1)(1), Bangalore. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri T. Suryanarayana, Senior Advocate Revenue by : Shri K.R. Narayan, Addl. CIT DR Date of Hearing : 15-07-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 06-09-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present miscellaneous petition is filed by the assessee against order dated 21/03/2022 passed by this Tribunal seeking certain typographic mistakes. 2. The Ld.AR submitted that the only issue alleged before this Tribunal was in respect of charging of interest at 1.5% per month by applying CUP method as against LIBOR rate + 2% by the Ld.TPO. It was submitted that actually assessee has not agreed Page 2 of 3 M.P. No. 49/Bang/2022 (in IT(TP)A No. 2499/Bang/2017) with the interest on receivables to be a separate independent transaction however this Tribunal at page 13 of the impugned order has recorded the admission by the Ld.AR in respect of the same. 3. The Ld.AR referred to the submissions filed at the time of hearing wherein it was never admitted that interest on receivables to be a separate international transaction. The Ld.AR submitted that to this extent there is a mistake apparent on record. The Ld.DR relied on the observations of this Tribunal. We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in the light of records placed before us. 4. We note that it is no longer resintegra of the interest on receivables being a separate international transaction pursuant to the decision of Hon’ble Special Bench passed by Kolkata Tribunal in case of Instrumentation Corpn. Ltd. vs. Asstt. DIT(IT) reported in [2016] 71 taxmann.com 193. It is also noted from the submissions that assessee did not make any averment to that effect of admitting the interest on receivables to be separate international transaction. 5. In the light of the above observations, we exprenge the relevant observations in the impugned Tribunal order and modify the para at page 13 below the reproduction shall be henceforth read as under: “The Ld. Counsel agreed for the interest on receivables to be computed at LIBOR rate + 2%. Accordingly, the Ld.CIT.DR placed Page 3 of 3 M.P. No. 49/Bang/2022 (in IT(TP)A No. 2499/Bang/2017) reliance on orders passed by authorities below.” In the result, the M.P. filed by assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 06 th September, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (BEENA PILLAI) Accountant Member Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated, the 06 th September, 2022. /MS / Copy to: 1. Appellant 4. CIT(A) 2. Respondent 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore 3. CIT 6. Guard file By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore