2013 (11) TMI 820

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....0th March, 2013 relating to Assessment Year 2006-07. The petitioner after receipt of the said notice filed the present writ petition on 2nd May, 2013. Reasons to believe were supplied on 8th April, 2013 and have been enclosed as Annexure P-16 to the present writ petition. 2. In GKN Driveshafts (India) Limited versus ITO, (2003) 259 ITR 19 the Supreme Court after referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in Calcutta Discount Company Limited versus ITO, (1961) 41 ITR191 (SC), had laid down the following procedure:- "We see no justifiable reason to interfere with the order under challenge. However, we clarify that when a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the proper course of action for the noticee is to file ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to approach the Assessing Officer but such cases would be few and far between...." 4. It is highlighted that in the present case the Korean Company, namely, Samsung Electronics Company Limited, South Korea was subjected to regular assessment proceedings by issue of notice and assessment order dated 18th October, 2012 stands passed. The said order, it is submitted, is pursuant to directions under Section 144C(5) made by the Dispute Resolution Panel. It is highlighted that after examining the merits it has been held that remuneration cost of expatriate employees of Rs.10,72,24,310/- should be taken as the base and mark up of 10% be applied on it and, therefore, addition of Rs.1,07,22,431/- was made and treated as business income. No other....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y be recalled that a rough and ready function analysis that is possible given the facts of the case and the lack of time available, (considering that the directions are to be issued by us by 30.9.2012) was performed by us and the attribution made by the A.O. was confirmed (para 5.4.3 above). In view of this position, this issue does not need to be examined further. With the above directions, the objections made by the assessee to the draft order are treated as disposed. The A.O. is directed to complete the assessment keeping in view the above directions." 6. Having considered the contentions, we feel that it will not be appropriate and proper in the facts of the present case to permit and allow the petitioner to bypass and forgo the p....