TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal remits tax appeal for detailed review, stresses importance of Transfer Pricing compliance</h1> <h3>Saksoft Ltd Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle VI (1), Chennai</h3> Saksoft Ltd Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle VI (1), Chennai - TM Issues:Transfer Pricing AdditionDisallowance under Sec. 40(a)(ia)Deduction u/s. 10BDisallowance u/s. 14ATransfer Pricing Addition:The appeal challenged the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding Transfer Pricing Addition. The Assessing Officer found international transactions, leading to a Transfer Pricing Officer's involvement. The TPO determined Arms Length Price based on transactions reported in Audit form under 3CEB, with the assessee adopting TNMM and CUP method. The TPO questioned professional services paid to a UK-based company, Acuma Solutions, for training employees. The TPO found discrepancies in the profits gained compared to the expenses incurred for training, leading to an adjustment of professional fees. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the TPO's decision, citing shifting of profits and questioning the genuineness of payments. The Tribunal remitted the issue back to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for a detailed adjudication, emphasizing the importance of a speaking order consistent with Transfer Pricing Provisions.Disallowance under Sec. 40(a)(ia):The appeal contested the disallowance under Sec. 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS on professional payments. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the addition of Rs. 50 lakhs, citing the Assessing Officer's action as appropriate. However, partial relief was granted regarding deduction u/s. 10B, following the assessee's case for previous assessment years. The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the need for proper adjudication and consideration of all points of dispute.Deduction u/s. 10B:The issue of deduction u/s. 10B was raised concerning the determination of export turnover. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) directed the Assessing Officer to recompute the deduction following the assessee's case for earlier years. The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, highlighting the importance of passing a speaking order considering all material evidence.Disallowance u/s. 14A:The final issue pertained to disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the disallowance despite no income received, citing the applicability of Rule 8D and judicial decisions. The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the need for a detailed adjudication and consideration of all submissions before passing an order.In conclusion, the Tribunal remitted the disputed issues back to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for a comprehensive and detailed adjudication, ensuring that the assessee is provided with adequate opportunity for a fair hearing before a decision is made. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of passing speaking orders consistent with legal provisions and natural justice principles.
TaxTMI 