TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (5) TMI 343
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case are that the assessee has adopted Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) to determine the Arm's Length Price (ALP). On examination of the service agreement between the assessee and the AE, M/s SCM Micro System (Asia) Pte. Ltd., Singapore, the TPO was of the view that the assessee's service income should be received at Rs. 11,52,60,199/- in place of Rs. 11,22,56,926/-. The assessee argued before the TPO that the mark up on cost of the company is more than that of the comparable companies, the transactions entered into by the company with the AE is at Arm's Length and therefore, no adjustment was required. According to the TPO, when the assessee is able to ultimately collect revenue with reasonable certainty, there is no need to postpone....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thod is not acceptable in the TP Regulation in India. Therefore, there is no fault in the reasoning of the TPO in adopting the cost plus method (CPM) as the MAM. In this background and in view of the facts of the case we are of the considered view that the CPM is the MAM as adopted by the TPO for arriving at the value of international transactions and the ALP and interference in her action is required by the Panel. Consequently, we uphold the upward adjustment of Rs. 30,03,273/- as proposed by the TPO in the order dated 03/07/2009 which was adopted by the A.O. in the draft assessment order. The addition of Rs. 30,03,273/- is therefore confirmed. These grounds of dispute are therefore, rejected. 4. In Ground Nos. 6 to 11, the assessee has c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aw, accordingly, the disallowance as proposed by the A.O in re-working the deduction u/s 10B is confirmed. This ground of dispute is therefore, rejected." 7. On a careful consideration of the order passed by the DRP, we find that though the DRP has stated that a written submission objecting the order of the TPO was filed by the assessee, but we find that the contents and various objections of the assessee have not been brought on record by the DRP. The DRP has not dealt with each of the objections of the assessee by passing a speaking order there against and by ascribing cogent reasons for not accepting the objections of the assessee. 8. In the similar facts and circumstances where the DRP has passed a non-speaking order, the Delhi 'H 'Be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....records relating to the draft order; (f) evidence collected by, or caused to be colleted by, it; and (g) result of any inquiry made by, or caused to be made by, it. Under sub-section (7), DRP is also authorized before issuing of direction under sub-section (5) to make such further inquiry, as it think fit or cause any further inquiry to be made by any income-tax authority and report the result of the same to it. Under sub-section (8) the DRP has power to confirm, reduce or enhance the variations proposed in the draft order so, however, that it shall not set aside any proposed variation or issue any direction under sub-section (5) for further inquiry and passing of the assessment order. Under sub-section (11) no direction u/s subsection (5) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a non-speaking order not stating the objections raised by the assessee and the reasons have also not been given as simply the order of TPO and Assessing Officer are referred. We find that similar issue was considered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the aforementioned case of Vodafone Essar Ltd. (supra) against the order passed by the DRP-II and Ors. and the said Writ Petition has been decided by the Hon'ble High Court vide their order dated 2nd December, 2010. The assessee had filed a writ of certiorari seeking the quashing the order of DRP and the revenue contended before the Hon'ble High Court that the order in question deserve to be quashed and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication. The said order of the Hon'ble Delhi High C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etition is allowed to the extent indicated above without any order as to costs. Order dasti under the signatures of the Court Master." [WPO (C) 7028/2010] 12. This Tribunal in many of such cases has restored the issue to the file of DRP for passing a speaking order on each of the objection of the assessee raised before it. Therefore, we find that it is a fit case where the entire matter should be restored back to the file of DRP to pass a detailed order stating all the objections of the assessee and disposing them by giving a cogent and germane reasons for adjudication of the objections of the assessee. We direct accordingly. After receiving the order from DRP, the Assessing Officer will again pass order u/s 144C(13) and the present asse....