TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (12) TMI 1158
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ents. The Disputes Resolution Panel (DRP) however gave a relief on account of royalty payments. However, it upheld the addition on account of arms length pricing for allied payments. Similarly, the A.O. made an addition of Rs. 45 lacs on account of payment of overhead expenses and personal cost. The A.O. disallowed the amount equivalent to 50% of the claim on the basis that charges reimbursed were not related to actual services. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 2. At the outset, Ld. A.R. submitted that the case of assessee is squarely covered by the order of the Tribunal in the case of assessee itself in Assessment Year 2008-09. Our attention was invited to order of the Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 5297/- placed as annexure 'A'. I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....larified that there is no difference between the facts and circumstances of Assessment Year 2008-09 and present year to which Ld. D.R. also agreed. We have gone through the order of the tribunal for Assessment Year 2008-09 in the assessee's own case along with the order of TPO for Assessment Year 2008-09 and 2007-08 and find that TPO has passed similar orders in these two Assessment Years whereby he made addition on account of royalty and other allied payments. We find that Hon'ble Tribunal vide order dated 23.08.2013 in I.T.A. No. 5297 in the case of assessee itself, under similar facts and circumstances has held as under: "i) Regarding International Transaction: "8. We have carefully considered the submissions and perused the records. W....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....proved. Thus, we find that DRP has held that the royalty payment was at arm's length which cover a substantial part of TPO's disallowance at Rs. 156,43,832/-. The DRP has observed that as for the payment made under the other heads the stand taken by the TPO was approved. We find that regarding the payments made under other heads, TPO has not at all taken any detailed stand throughout his transfer pricing order. The TPO has discussed the transaction of royalty payment. He has not taken up any other heads independently. In these Circumstances, we find that there is no cogent basis for sustaining the addition made with regard to the payment of technical fee, training fee, testing expenses, payment of modification of tools and payment o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ries Ltd. were noted. That the Assessing Officer has not responded to the above submissions and has proceeded to make ad hoc of 50% of expenses. DRP has also affirmed Assessing Officer's action by stating that claim of assessee that 17% of the time of employees of MIL has been spent for the assessee is also without any supporting *evidence. Thus, we find that there is conflict between submissions of the assessee and finding by the authorities below. While assessee is claiming to have submitted elaborate details. The revenue has claimed that proper supporting evidence were not there." 15. In our considered opinion, in these circumstances, interest of justice demands that's the matt4er may be remitted to the file of the A.O. Accordingly,....