AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (7) TMI 918
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../2010 for the Assessment! Year ('AY') 2004-05. 2. Admit. The following questions of law are framed for consideration: (i) Whether the impugned order passed by ITAT is perverse and unsustainable in law as it is based on an erroneous assumption of fact that CUP method was approved by CIT(A) for benchmarking the transaction of "import of raw material, components and semi-finished goods" under Class I segment? (ii) Whether the impugned order passed by ITAT is perverse and unsustainable in law as it is based on an erroneous assumption of fact that RPM method was approved by CIT(A) for benchmarking the transaction of "import of finished goods" under Class II segment?" 3. The facts in brief are that the Appellant, a public limited company inco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 92 (C) of the Act. 6. The Appellant filed its return for the AY in question disclosing the international transactions in the above segments with its AE. The Assessing Officer (AO) made a reference to the TPO under Section 92(C)(A)(3) of the Act for the determination of the Arm's Length Price (ALP) of the international transactions undertaken by the Appellant under Class I, II and III segments with its AE. 7. It requires to be noted that the fact that the Appellant adopted the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method for benchmarking the Class III segment transactions was accepted by the TPO. That is therefore not the subject matter of the present appeal. As far as the Class I and Class II segment transactions are concerned, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....T (A) held in favour of the Assessess In other words, the CIT(A) disagreed with the TPO and upheld the contention of the Assessee that TNMM was the MAM as regards the transactions under Class I as well as Class II segments. 10. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By the impugned order the ITAT set aside the impugned order of the CIT (A) deleting the additions made by the AO. The ITAT remanded the matter to the TPO/AO for determining afresh the ALP of Class I international transactions under the CUP method and of Class II international transactions under the RPM as per law. 11. Mr. Nageshwar Rao, counsel for the Assessee at the outset pointed out that the ITAT has committed certain glaring fact....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The further question arises is whether this Court should now remit the matter to ITAT in view of the above factual errors. 17.In this context, Mr. Nageshwar Rao, counsel appearing for the Assessee, relied on the decision dated 19th February 2016 of this Court in ITA No. 157 of 2016 (Commissioner of Income Tax Del II v. Cargill Food India Ltd.) whereby this Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the order dated 10th April 2015 of the ITAT in ITA No. 1460/PN/2010. He further pointed out that the said judgment of this Court has been upheld by the Supreme Court by the dismissal of the Revenue's SLP (CC 1900/2007) titled Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi v, Cargill Food India Limited on 28th November 2016. In the said order, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ally no change in the classification or the nature of international transactions "undertaken or the functional profile of the Assessee. In other words, the functional profile of the Assessee for the AY in question i.e. AY 2004-05 has not changed in the subsequent AYs i.e. 2007-08 to 2010-11. The TPO has in each of the subsequent AYs i.e. 2007-08 to 2010-11 accepted the TP Study .of the Assessee insofar as the determination of ALP for the Class' T Class II segment international transactions are concerned. 20. Consequently, the Court is unable to accept the plea of the Revenue in the present case that the Court should proceed on the assumption that the Assessee "had changed his business profile and functions." If there is, in fact, no ch....