TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (1) TMI 1550
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct, 1961 (in short 'the Act') vide order dated 17/1/2014 for asst. year 2009-10. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- "The order of the TPO /DRP /Assessing Officer in so far as it is against the Appellant, is opposed to law, weight of evidence, natural justice, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case. 2. The appellant denies itself to be assessed on a total income of Rs. 3,82,59,3501- as against income of Rs. 1.09,28,410/- as declared by the appellant. 3. a) The order of the assessment is bad in law as the mandatory conditions to invoke the jurisdiction under section 92CA of the Act did not exist, or having not been complied with and con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Rule JOB (1) (e) (ii) as per which even if one of the comparables selected by the appellant satisfies the computation mechanism for determination of the ALP, the determination of ALP by using arithmetic mean of different comparables not warranted. 10. The TPO, DRP and the Assessing Officer erred in selecting the following new companies as comparables towards software development services under the facts and circumstances of the case a) Bodhtree Consulting Ltd., b) Infosys Ltd c) Kals Information Systems Ltd., d) Larsen &Tubro infotech e) Mindtree Ltd., J) Persistent Systems Ltd., g) Sasken Communication Technologies Ltd., h) Tata Elsxi Ltd., i) Zylog....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cting companies with very high turnover (more than Rs. 200 crores) as comparables on the facts and circumstances of the case. 16 The DRP exceeded its jurisdiction by directing the TPO to consider the claim of acceptance of the internal comparables selected by the appellant which is violative of the provisions of section 144C(8) of the Act. 17. The assessment order passed is bad in law as the order ought to have been passed under section 143(3) r.v.s 144C of the Act and not under section under section 143(3) r.w.s 92CA of the Act. 18. The appellant denies itself liable to be levied to interest under section 234B of the Act and further the computation of interest under section 234B was not provided to the appellant ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on hand are that a draft order of assessment for asst. year 2009-10 was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 92CA of the Act vide order dated 14/3/2013. Aggrieved by this order, the assessee filed its objections thereto before the DRP, who issued its directions thereon u/s 144C(5) of the Act on 30/12/2013. The Id AR submits that, as per law, i.e the provisions of sec. 144C of the Act, the AO is bound to have passed the final order of assessment in conformity with the directions of the DRP within one month from the end of the month which such directions are issued; but failed to do so. In this context, the Id DR drew the attention of the bench to the impugned final order of assessment to illustrate that the same was passed on 17/1/2014 u/s 143(3) r.w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....R, however, prayed that, in the interest of equity and justice, since the AO's error is not fatal the impugned final order of assessment be set aside and the AO be directed to pass a fresh final order in conformity with the DRP's directions. 3.3.1 We have heard the rival contention of both parties in the matter and perused and carefully considered the material on record. The undisputed facts on record, as brought out by the discussions above, is that the AO, as per law, was required to pass the final order of assessment dated 17/1/2014 for asst. year 2009-10 u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144C of the Act in conformity with the directions issued by the DRP u/s 144C(5) of the Act, which are binding on him as per section 144C(10) thereof and with....