2020 (12) TMI 1371

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tal tax computed is hereby disputed. 3. That the findings, reasons, conclusions and directions of Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) u/s 144C are unsustainable in law requires to be set aside. Consequently the additions based on such directions also requires to be set aside. 4. The DRP erred in not considering the relevant materials, evidences, data and relevant law. The directions. issued are without application of mind. 5. That the Orders AO/TPO Directions of the DRP violates the principles of judicial discipline as the binding nature of the orders of the higher appellate authorities have been totally ignored. 6. That the order of the AO/TPO/DRP and the directions given therein are bad in law and not as per law requires to be cancelled. 7. That the AO/TPO/DRP erred in not providing adequate and sufficient opportunity as required under law thus violating the principle of natural justice, hence on this ground alone the orders requires to be annulled. ISSUE OF TRANSFER PRICING 8. That the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer is without jurisdiction, against the law, facts, circumstances, natural justice, equity and all othe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gth Price difference in the distribution segment amounting Rs.175,84,64,764/-. ii. The Learned AO / TPO / DRP erred in making adjustment on transactions beyond AE transactions, thus, the adjustment proposed includes non AE transactions. iii. The Learned AO / TPO / DRP erred in wrongly adopting the financial results of the assessee. iv.The Learned AO / TPO / DRP erred in comparing the appellant's distribution margin with comparables which are not in the business of trading/ distribution. v. The Learned AO / TPO / DRP erred in not following their own orders passed for the earlier asst. years on this issue. vi. The selection of the method by the Learned AO / TPO / DRP is not as per law. vii. The Learned AO / TPO / DRP erred in not granting the variances deduction envisaged in the Act and Circular. viii. The Learned AO / TPO / DRP erred in not carrying out the adjustments as required under law as well as the facts. ix. The Learned AO/TPO/DRP have failed to identify a comparable in terms of Rule 10B(3). x. The Learned TPO/DRP erred in rejecting certain comparables on unsustainable and untenable grounds/....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... companies. 14.(i) The Learned AO / TPO / DRP erred in making adjustment towards the Arms Length Price difference in the Software Development Segment amounting Rs.70,17,53,230/-. ii) The Learned AO / TPO / DRP erred in selecting the comparables. The selection of comparables does not confirm to the I.T. 1Rules. Further it also does not comply with the case laws on this point. iii)The Learned AO / TPO / DRP erred in not carrying out the adjustments like risk, working capital, etc., as required under law as well as the facts. iv The Learned AO / TPO / DRP erred in wrongly adopting the financial results of the assessee. v)The Learned AO/TPO/DRP have failed to identify a comparable in terms of Rule 10B(3). vi)The Learned TPO/DRP erred in rejecting certain comparables on unsustainable and untenable grounds/reasons while considering comparables which failed to meet the filters /criteria as required under law. vii) The Learned AO/TPO/DRP erred in not granting the variances deduction envisaged in the Act and Circular. The Learned TPO/DRP have failed to apply the provisions of Rule 10B(4)&(5) & 10CA(2) while selecting the criteri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....unting to Rs.60,00,000/-. 17. The Learned AO / DRP erred in disallowing the sum of Rs. 7,49,33,375/- being 30% of Rs.24,97,77,917/- for non deduction of tax at source u/s.40(i)(ia) of the Act on the following provision for expense Expenses under which provisions are made and no TDS deducted Amount (Rs.) Advertisement 10,93,276 Legal and Professional charges 16,72,58,556 Repairs and Maintenance 57,58,470 Miscellaneous Expenses (-)01,39,11,153 Dealer Commission 8,95,78,767 TOTAL 2 4,97,77,917     18. The AO/DRP failed to appreciate and consider that if payees/receivers/deductees have paid the tax then no disallowance can be made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 19. The above disallowances have been made without providing sufficient and adequate opportunity as required under law and the Act. On this ground alone the above disallowances requires to be deleted. 20. The Learned AO/DRP erred in not granting relief u/s 90 of the Act to the extent of Rs.11,72,448/- and no reasons have been given for not giving credit for the above amount. 21. The Learned AO/DRP erred in not giving TDS credit amou....