TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (10) TMI 1042
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....management was occupied with finalization of office and factory location and other necessary documentation and operation of statutory records of various government authorities. Due to shifting, the final assessment order was received by non-finance and accounts team. It took some time to locate the final assessment order and also financial accounts team were engaged in upgradation of company's ERP software due to implementation of new GST requirements and other activities. Ld AR submitted that because of the above reasons the assessee could file the appeal with the delay. On the other hand, Ld DR objected to the above reasons. After considering the submissions of the assessee we are satisfied that the reasons brought to notice by Ld AR is reasonable grounds for such delay and accordingly we condone the delay and proceed to hear the appeal. 3. At the time of hearing Ld AR submitted that assessee has filed the grounds of appeal in which assessee is pressing only ground No. 2 all other grounds are not pressed. Accordingly, we dismiss the ground No. 1, 3 and 4 as not pressed. 4. The brief facts relating to ground No. 2 are, assessee is a subsidiary of Tokheim Group S.A.S (Tokheim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ces of the fixed assets. It has submitted 100% of the raw material invoices. The assessee provided the working of the cost of fixed assets in the below chart: Sr. No. Supplier Invoice reference Amount inGBP Amount in Euro GBPto Euro Conversion rate RM1 BROWNE & TAWSE 1558753 74.97 95.36 1.272 RM2 BROWNE & TAWSE 1559712 L 180.00 228.96 1.272 RM3 R.S. COMPONENTS 84973623 u 330.40 420.27 1.272 RM4 RES PRECISION ENGINEERING 2957 1,220.85 1,552.92 .1.272 RM5 R.S. COMPONENTS 84501568 178.86 227.51 1.272 RM6 BESPOKE BITS LTD 8673 5,800.00 7,377.60 1.272 RM7 RS Components - India test station 85780607 170.22 216.52 1.272 RM8 PIRTEK HOSES ASSEMBLIES 75709 253.14 321.99 1.272 RM9 R.S. COMPONENTS 86232281 25.07 31.89 1.272 Sr. No. Supplier Invoice reference Amount inGBP Amount in Euro GBPto Euro Conversion rate RM10 E P ENGINEERING. 11978 6,161.58 7,837.53 1.272 RM11 JOHN FRANKLIN 1 9,216.00 11,722.75 1.272 Total actual costs incurred (A) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....78 taxman.com 88 (Bombay). 9. Further, he submitted that assessee has imported these rigs and meter and customs authority has accepted the cost and the documentation, therefore it cannot be rejected. The Customs follows different method of ALP. He prayed that the ALP adjustment made by TPO be deleted. 10. On the other hand, Ld DR supported the findings of tax authorities and submitted that there is no comparabilities available for the transaction. 11. Considered the rival submissions and material on record. We notice that assessee has entered into various international transactions and one of the transaction is purchase of fixed assets from its AE. There is no dispute that assessee has imported certain rigs from its AE in UK. The issue before us is assessee has declared this transaction as international transaction and adopted the 'other method' for the purpose of arms length price. By declaring other method as appropriate method and treating the 5% markup as ALP for the transaction. We notice that TPO verified the invoices submitted by the assessee and found that there is difference in quantities mentioned in both the invoices and accordingly rejected the submissions of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....imilar situation TPO has treated the ALP as nil without following any method or parameters set out in chapter X of the act, the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Lever India Exports Ltd (supra) deleted the impugned addition made by TPO. For the sake of brevity, which is reproduced below:- 7. We note that the Tribunal has recorded the fact that the respondent assessee has launched new products which involved huge advertisement expenditure. The sharing of such expenditure by the respondent assessee is a strategy to develop its business. This results in improving the brand image of the products, resulting in higher profit to the respondent assessee due to higher sales. Further, it must be emphasized that the TPO's jurisdiction was to only determine the ALP of an International Transaction. In the above view, the TPO has to examine whether or not the method adopted to determine the ALP is the most appropriate and also whether the comparables selected are appropriate or not. It is not part of the TPO's jurisdiction to consider whether or not the expenditure which has been incurred by the respondent assessee passed the test of Section 37 of the Act and/or genuin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules 1963, which deals with pronouncement of orders, provides as follows: (5) The pronouncement may be in any of the following manners:- (a) The Bench may pronounce the order immediately upon the conclusion of the hearing. (b) In case where the order is not pronounced immediately on the conclusion of the hearing, the Bench shall give a date for pronouncement. (c ) In a case where no date of pronouncement is given by the Bench, every endeavour shall be made by the Bench to pronounce the order within 60 days from the date on which the hearing of the case was concluded but, where it is not practicable so to do on the ground of exceptional and extraordinary circumstances of the case, the Bench shall fix a future day for pronouncement of the order, and such date shall not ordinarily(emphasis supplied by us now) be a day beyond a further period of 30 days and due notice of the day so fixed shall be given on the noticeboard. 8. Quite clearly, "ordinarily" the order on an appeal should be pronounced by the bench within no more than 90 days from the date of concluding the hearing. It is, however, important to note that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d with order dated 23.3.2020, extended the limitation to exclude not only this lockdown period but also a few more days prior to, and after, the lockdown by observing that "In case the limitation has expired after 15.03.2020 then the period from 15.03.2020 till the date on which the lockdown is lifted in the jurisdictional area where the dispute lies or where the cause of action arises shall be extended for a period of 15 days after the lifting of lockdown". Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in an order dated 15th April 2020, has, besides extending the validity of all interim orders, has also observed that, "It is also clarified that while calculating time for disposal of matters made time-bound by this Court, the period for which the order dated 26th March 2020 continues to operate shall be added and time shall stand extended accordingly", and also observed that "arrangement continued by an order dated 26th March 2020 till 30th April 2020 shall continue further till 15th June 2020". It has been an unprecedented situation not only in India but all over the world. Government of India has, vide notification dated 19th February 2020, taken the stand that, the coronavirus "should be considere....