2020 (10) TMI 615

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ectively. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- ITA No. 3529/DEL/2015 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in quashing/deleting the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) & 271AA of the IT Act. ITA No. 3530/DEL/2015 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in quashing/deleting the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) & 271AA of the IT Act. 3. Firstly we are taking up the Assessment Year 2006-07 as the facts are identical in both the assessment year. The assessee i.e. Convergys Customer Management Group Inc. is a non-resident company incorporated under laws of United States of America ('USA'). It provides outsourced customer, employee and marketing support services as well as co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er held that the same are taxable at 15% as "Equipment Royalty" as per clause (iva) of Explanation 2 to Section 9(1) (vi) of the Act and Article 12(2) read with Article 12(3) (b) of the DTAA. The assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal has given a finding as follows:- • The assessee has a Fixed Place PE in India. • The assessee Company does not have a Dependent Agent PE in India. • The method adopted for attribution of profits to PE, by the Assessing Officer and the CIT (A) is not correct and reliable and accordingly, the Tribunal gave its own methodology for arriving at t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing documents/information u/s 273B has simplicitor deleted the penalty. The Ld. DR pointed out the finding portion in Para 10.3 that the assessee has not maintained its TP Study report but in fact the Indian AE of the assessee has maintained the TP Study report which is relied by the assessee as being his own TP Study report. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) should be quashed. 7. The Ld. AR relied upon the CIT(A) order. The Ld. AR further submitted that there was no international transaction, therefore, there was no need to maintain the TP documents. 8. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. From the perusal of the records it seems that the assessee was not maintaining its separate TP documents.....