ACIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI V. GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS LTD, MUMBAI

MA 52/MUM/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4458 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-04-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 31-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GURBINDER SINGH
• Keywords: Transfer pricing

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , K BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE : SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI RAVISH SOOD , JM MA NO.52/MUM.2020 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 5841 /MUM/ 20 17 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013 - 1 4 ) ACIT(LTU) - 1 CENTRE - 1, 29 TH FLOOR WORLD T RADE CENTRE CUFFE PARADE, MUMBAI 400 005 VS. M/S. GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., GLENMARK HOUSE, HDO CORPORATE BUILDING WING - A, B.D. SAWANT MARG CHAKALA, OPP. WESTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI - 400099 PAN/GIR NO. AAACG2207L (APPELLANT ) .. (RESPONDENT ) REVENUE BY SHRI GURBINDER SINGH ASSESSEE BY SHRI ANUJ KISNADWALA DATE OF HEARING 12 / 02 /202 1 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 09 / 04 /202 1 / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M) : BY VIRTUE OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE REVENUE SEEKS TO RECALL THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.5841/MUM/2017 DATED 21/08/2019 FOR THE A.Y.2013 - 14. 2. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE I N M A NO . 52/MUM/2020 M/S. GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED 2 THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS THAT THE LD. PR. COMMISSIONER HAD AUTHORISED THE LD. AO TO FILE 12 GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL AND WHEREAS THE LD. AO IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED ALONGWITH FORM 36 BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL HAD CHOSEN TO PREFER O NLY ONE GROUND IN RESPECT OF ISSUE OF TRANSFER PRICING ADJUSTMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COMFORT GUARANTEE. WE FIND THAT THIS TRIBUNAL WHILE DISPOSING OFF THE APPEAL HAD ADJUDICATED THE GROUND RAISED BEFORE IT. MERELY BECAUSE THE LD. PR. COMMISSIONER HAD IN HIS AUT HORISATION MEMO APPROVED 12 GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, THE TRIBUNAL COULD BE EXPECTED TO LOOK INTO ONLY THOSE GROUNDS WHICH ARE FILED AND DULY SIGNED BY THE LD.AO . MOREOVER, THE TRIBUNAL IS REQUIRED TO ADJUDICATE THE GROUNDS OF APPE AL RAISED BEFORE IT EITHER BY THE REVENUE OR BY THE ASSESSEE. ADMITTEDLY , THE TRIBUNAL HAD INDEED DEALT AND ADJUDICATED THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ALONGWITH FORM 36 IN RESPECT OF TRANSFER PRICING ADJUSTMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COMFORT GUARANTEE. IF THE LD . AO IN HIS WISDOM CHOSE NOT TO RAISE THE OTHER GROUNDS WHICH HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE LD. PCIT IN HIS AUTHORISATION MEMO, IT IS AN ISSUE WHICH HAD TO BE INTERNALLY SORTED OUT BETWEEN THE LD. AO AND THE LD. PCIT. NO ERROR WHATSOEVER COULD BE ATTRIBUTED ON THE PART OF THE TRIBUNAL WARRANTING ANY RECTIFICATION OF THE ORDER U/S.254(2) OF THE ACT IN THIS REGARD. AT BEST THIS CAN ONLY BE TREATED AS A MISTAKE ON THE PART OF THE REVENUE AND NOT ON THE PART OF THE TRIBUNAL. WHEN THESE FACTS WERE PUT FORTH , THE LD. DR SOUGHT TIME TO FILE THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON OR BEFORE 05/03/2021. BUT NO SUCH WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WERE FILED BY THE REVENUE TIL L THE TIME OF DICTATION OF THIS ORDER. SINCE REVENUE HAS BEEN GIVEN SUFFICIENT TIME OF MORE THAN 20 DAYS TO FILE ITS WRIT TEN SUBMISSIONS AS SOUGHT FOR, THERE IS NO POINT IN KEEPING THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION PENDING WITH US. HENCE, WE PROCEED ED TO DISPOSE OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION. M A NO . 52/MUM/2020 M/S. GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED 3 3. IN VIEW OF OUR AFORESAID DETAILED OBSERVATIONS, WE HOLD THAT THIS TRIBUNAL HA D DULY ADJUDICATED THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE WHICH WAS ENCLOSED ALONGWITH FORM NO.36 AND WHICH WAS ALSO DULY SIGNED BY THE LD. AO. IN ANY CASE, THE TRIBUNAL IS EXPECTED TO ADJUDICATE THE GROUNDS RAISED BEFORE IT BY THE LD. AO THAT HAS BEEN DULY DONE IN THE INSTANT CASE. HENCE, WE HOLD THAT THIS IS NOT A FIT CASE WARRANTING ANY RECTIFICATION U/S.254(2) OF THE ACT, HENCE, THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ARE DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. OR DER PRONOUNCED ON 09 / 04 /202 1 BY WAY OF PROPER MENTIONING IN THE NOTICE BOARD. SD/ - ( RAVISH SOOD ) SD/ - (M.BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED 09 / 04 / 2021 KARUNA , SR.PS M A NO . 52/MUM/2020 M/S. GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED 4 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 16/03/2021 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 16/03/2021 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBE R JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. 11. DICTATION PAD IS ENCLOSED YES 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//