TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 572
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be referred as under: I have gone through the facts of this ground. I find that from the facts brought out that the draft order of the A.O. was issued under section 144C(1) and received by the appellant on February 24, 2014. However, the appellant has not been able to demonstrate as to the contention of the AO that such draft order was received by the assessee on February 22, 2014 as the receipt was stamped by the assessee's authorized representatives office should not be accepted. In this background the DRP have decided the objections to be non-este, the having been filed on March 26, 2014. Therefore, as per the AO, a stand supported by the DRP the appellant was late in filing its objections before the DRP. It is seen that the A.O. finally passed the order on 9 December, 2014. The present appeal has been filed in this office on 13 Jan, 2015 with the order having been received by the appellant on 17 December, 2014. However, the appellant has not been able to demonstrate as to the contention of the A.O. that such draft order was received by the assessee on February 22, 2014 as the receipt was stamped by the assessee's authorized representatives office. By virtue of this the appea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e date mentioned in Form No. 35A filed by the Appellant). It is prayed that the said observation of the learned DCIT ought not to be considered as the Appellant had not provided any wrong information in Form 35A. Ground No, 3 - Validity of the learned AO's order dated December 09, 2014 On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the learned DCIT erred in passing the assessment order, dated December 9, 2014, under section 143(3) r.w.s. 1440(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') as the order has been passed beyond the time limit prescribed under section 144C(4) of the Act. The Appellant prays that the above order be quashed as the same is bad in law. Ground No. 4 - General - Total Income On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the learned DCIT erred in making additions and assessing the total income of the Appellant for the year at Rs. 5,52,50,130 as against the returned income of NIL. It is prayed that the learned DCIT be directed to delete the additions made. Ground No. 5 - Addition on Account of Royalty On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the learned DCIT erred in concluding that 90% of the receipt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hment in India. Ground No. 8 - Invoking Rule 10 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the DCIT erred in invoking the provisions of Rule 10 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 for attributing 90% of the total receipts as Royalties and the balance 10% as FIS. The Appellant prays that the learned DCIT be directed not to invoke the provisions of Rule 10 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Ground No. 9 - Addition on account of reimbursement of expenses On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the learned DCIT erred in including as part of the total income, a sum of Rs. 47,24,930, being reimbursements received for actual expenses incurred by the Appellant on the ground that the facts of the current year are identical with the facts of Assessment Year ('AY1) 2000-01 and subsequent years, where addition has been made by the learned DCIT's predecessor on this account. It is prayed that the learned DCIT be directed to delete the addition to the Appellant's income on account of reimbursement of expenses, as the same does not constitute taxable income. Ground No. 10 - General - Rate of tax Without prejudice to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ys of the receipt by him of the draft order, - (a) file his acceptance of the variations to the Assessing Officer, or (b) file his objections, if any, to such variation with, (i) the Dispute Resolution-Panel; and (ii) the Assessing Officer." 5. It can be seen from the provisions of section 144C(2) of the Act that on receipt of the draft order, the eligible assessee shall, within thirty-days of the receipt by him of the draft order either would file his acceptance of the variations to the Assessing Officer or file his objections, if any, to such variations with the Dispute Resolution Panel and the Assessing Officer. Therefore, as per the-aforesaid provisions of the Act, the eligible assessee has to file his objections, if any, to the variations proposed in the draft order within thirty days of the receipt by him of the said draft order. In the provisions relating to filing of objections before Dispute Resolution Panel, there is no provision which allows the delayed filing of objections by the eligible assessee. 6. In the facts of the case, the objections filed are beyond the period of thirty days and against such factual position of the delayed, filing of the objec....