TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (3) TMI 1436
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... MA and submits that in the 1st ground of appeal raised by it, the applicant had challenged the action of the AO/TPO/DRP of making an adjustment of Rs.4,48,60,208/- vis-à-vis the consultancy and design services rendered by it to its AEs. In respect of granting of working capital adjustment to the Company vis-à-vis the comparables, it is stated that reliance was placed on the decision in Walt Disney Co. (India) (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2017) 81 taxmann.com 321 (MumbaiTrib.); BA Continuum India (P.) Ltd. v. ADIT (2017) 79 taxmann.com 85 (Hyderabad-Trib.). Further, it is stated that comparable companies selected by the TPO viz. Celestial Biolabs Labs Ltd., E-Zest Solutions Ltd. and E-Infochips Bangalore Ltd. ought to be removed from t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ror to the extent it sets aside the 1st ground of appeal to file of the AO without reference to the authorities cited by the applicant is erroneous and therefore, a mistake/ error apparent from record. Regarding the 2nd ground of appeal i.e. adjustment relating to payment of management charges, the Ld. counsel submits that vide it the applicant had challenged the action of the AO/TPO/DRP of making an adjustment of Rs.1,10,25,109/- on account of payment of management charges by the applicant to its AEs. It is stated that during the course of hearing before the Bench, it was emphasized that in the order dated 31.10.2011, the TPO had proposed a transfer pricing adjustment of Rs.4,48,60,208/- on account of provision for consultancy and design ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....parate adjustment was made by the AO in the final assessment order dated 29.11.2012 on the issue of management fees, the said issue stood concluded in favour of the applicant and ought to be decided accordingly. The Ld. counsel explains that without any discussion whatsoever vis-a-vis the transfer pricing adjustment on management charges of Rs.1,10,25,109/-, the Bench has set aside the order of the AO and directed him to make an assessment de novo. Thus it is stated that the issues raised in both the 1st and 2nd ground of appeal are different and different arguments were advanced in respect of the two grounds ; while in the 1st ground of appeal, the applicant had challenged the transfer pricing adjustment of Rs.4,48,60,208/- made vis-avis ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the applicant had challenged the action of the AO/TPO/DRP of making an adjustment of Rs.4,48,60,208/- vis-a-vis the consultancy and design services rendered by it to its AEs. In the 2nd ground of appeal, it had challenged the action of the AO/TPO/DRP of making an adjustment of Rs.1,10,25,109/- on account of payment of management charges by the assessee to its AEs. The said grounds of appeal read as under : "Re.: Adjustment of Rs.4,48,60,208/- u/s 92CA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') on account of the provision of consultancy & design services: 1:1 The Assessing Officer ('AO') has erred in making an upward adjustment of Rs.4,48,60,208/- to the total income of the Appellant by holding that the international tran....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es. The TPO, after discussing the issue of payment of management fees, had not made any separate adjustment for the management fees of Rs.1,10,25,109/-, since the management fee was considered by him to be a part of the operating cost for the computation of the profit level indicator while determining the arm's length price of the design and consulting services. However, as mentioned earlier, the assessee in ITA No. 792/Mum/2013 for the impugned assessment year has raised in the 2nd ground of appeal - an adjustment of Rs.1,10,25,109/- relating to payment of management charges. The 2nd ground raised by the assessee has contributed to the confusion. 4.2 However, we are of the considered view that non-consideration of case laws cited during....