TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 713
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under:- 1 Addition on account of reimbursement of expenses to AE as per order of Transfer Pricing Officer: (i) The Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and facts in upholding order of Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO)/AO making adjustment of Rs. 2,26,10,000/- to income on account of reimbursement of expenses to AE by determining ALP at Rs. Nil. The reasons given by him for doing so are wrong, contrary to the facts of the case and against the provisions of law. (ii) The CIT (A) erred in law and facts in upholding order of Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO)/AO treating reimbursement of expenses as payment for services rendered by AE. The reasons given by him for doing so are wrong, contrary to the fac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of reimbursement of expenses of Rs. 2,26,10,000/- of its associated enterprise, M/s.Kuoni Travel Holdings Ltd., Switzerland. Before the Transfer Pricing Officer, assessee explained that the said amount was paid on account of FITA ( Future Business and IT Architecture). The Transfer Pricing Officer considered the details and submissions put-forth by the assessee and observed that the assessee had neither proved that such services were essential for its business nor that any services had indeed been rendered by the associated enterprise. Considering that assessee was not able to prove that the services have resulted into any direct or intangible benefit, the Transfer Pricing Officer concluded that there was "no need to find the arm's length v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f 2014 & Others dated 23/01/2017, copy of which has been placed on record. On this aspect, it was contended that the issue at hand may be sent back to the file of Assessing Officer to verify the allowability of expenditure under section 37(1) of the Act after providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 4.1 In so far as invoking of section 40(a)(i) of the Act by the Assessing Officer is concerned, the only plea raised before us is that in the subsequent year assessee has deducted the requisite tax at source and, therefore, such sum would become allowable in the subsequent year. In this back ground, the Ld. Representative for the assessee submitted that the assessee has no objection if the invoking of section 40(a)(i) of the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e stand of the assessee. 6.2 Thus, on the first issue, assessee succeeds for statistical purposes only. 7. The only other issue in this appeal is that the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under section 14A of the Act at Rs. 12,02,115/- as against of a sum of Rs. 1,99,041/- suo-moto disallowed by the assessee. In this context, relevant facts are that the Assessing Officer computed the disallowance under section 14A of the Act by applying Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962( in short 'the Rules') at Rs. 12,02,115/-. The said action has also been affirmed by the CIT(A). 8. Before us, the short point raised by the assessee is based on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Dish TV India Ltd. vs. ACIT, ITA ....