TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 242
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessment year 2009-10. 2. The brief facts of the case as emanating from the records are: The assessee is a 100% subsidiary of Schaeffler KG Germany. The assessee is engaged in the manufacturing of roller bearings, linear guides bearings systems and engine components for various automobile companies. During the impugned assessment years the assessee entered into various international transactions with its Associated Enterprises (AE). For benchmarking the same the assessee adopted Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) in assessment year 2008-09. In respect of international transactions in assessment year 2009-10 the assessee adopted TNMM method as the most appropriate method for some of the transactions and for other transactions, the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Cost plus 5% Reimbursement of expenses paid 3,26,15,978 Actuals Reimbursement of expenses received 49,950 Actuals Total 1,61,33,11,882 Since, there were huge international transactions with AE in the impugned assessment years, the Assessing Officer referred the same to Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for verification of correctness or otherwise of ALP of these transactions. The TPO vide order dated 28-10-2011 rejected the benchmarking of international transactions done by the assessee with its AE and made upward adjustment of Rs. 19,97,51,177/- in assessment year 2008-09. Similarly, for the assessment year 2009- 10 the TPO rejected the benchmarking done by the assessee of international transa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pect of under capacity utilization adjustment granted to the assessee. The ld. DR made an alternate prayer that the matter may be remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer/TPO for reconsidering the issue relating to the under capacity utilization adjustment. The ld. DR further submitted that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in assessment year 2009-10 has erred in directing the Assessing Officer/TPO to apply the filter of "minimum 75% of manufacturing income" without giving any valid reason for giving such direction. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to take into consideration the fact that without carrying out fresh study of comparables, the revised filter cannot be applied. 4. On the other hand Shri Mil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in impugned order has erred in observing that no written submissions were filed for the assessment year 2009-10. The impugned order was passed on 19-08-2013, the assessee had filed written submissions before the date of passing of impugned order. The ld. AR submitted that the written submissions were received in his office through E-mail on 08-08-2013 and thereafter the revised submissions were received on 15-08-2013. The hard copy of the written submissions was received in the office of the assessee on 13-08-2013. The same were furnished in the office of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) before the passing of order on 19-08-2013. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to take ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the benefit of 'under capacity utilization' has been granted by the Tribunal in various cases wherever the assessee deserves or where the facts and circumstances of the case warrants so. In the present case, it is not clearly emerging from the records as to on what basis under capacity utilization adjustment is to be granted to the assessee. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to remit the file back to TPO for deciding the issue afresh by passing speaking order. The TPO shall decide the issue after considering the facts of the case, documents on record and in the light of decisions of Tribunal. The appeal of the Department for the assessment year 2008-09 is accordingly allowed for statistical purpose. ITA Nos. 1797 & 1974/PN/2013 (A.....