2015 (2) TMI 1084
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t : Peeyush Jain, CIT (Dr) ORDER J. S. Reddy (Accountant Member) This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of Assessing Officer passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C r.w.s. 254 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 2. In the first round of appellate proceedings the ITAT, in ITA No. 5730/Del/2011 order dated 5.9.2012 held as follows: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....with law on considering the aforesaid data provided by the assessee before the TPO." 3. The DRP vide its order dated 16.8.2013 in the set aside proceeding at Para 6 & 7 has observed as follows: "6. In view of the above directions of the Hon'ble ITAT, the matter before the DRP is limited to re-appraisal of the data provided by the assessee before the TPO on the issue of availing of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h both. Therefore, after carefully examining the documents produced before the TPO, DRP comes to the conclusion that the TPO was right in holding that the arm's length price of this transaction relating to receipt of corporate services was nil. " 5. Aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal, it also filed an application for admission of additional evidence as the DRP did not consider the evide....
TaxTMI