2023 (9) TMI 606

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at on facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO grossly erred in passing the impugned order without appreciating the correct factual position and legal principles brought on record by the Appellant. 2. The Hon'ble DRP erred on the facts and law and violated the powers granted under section 144C(5) of the Act by not passing a speaking order in respect of adjustment pertaining to the international transaction of provision of consultancy services (hereinafter referred to as "subject transaction") by the Appellant to its AES. 3. The Learned TPO erred in law by not complying with the direction of the Hon'ble DRP while passing the order giving effect to such directions thus the order so passed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ifferent accounting year (i.e. having accounting year other than March 31 or companies whose financial statements were for a period other than 12 months). 9. The learned AO/TPO and Hon'ble DRP have erred, in law and on facts and circumstances of the case, by wrongfully rejecting certain similar companies from and adding certain dissimilar companies to the final set of comparable companies for benchmarking the subject transaction on an ad-hoc basis, thereby resorting to cherry picking of comparables for benchmarking the subject transaction. 10. The learned AO/TPO and Hon'ble DRP have erred, in law and on facts and circumstances of the case, by selecting certain companies (earning supernormal profits) as comparable t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in a total adjustment of Rs. 6,91,26,651/- was proposed. The assessee filed objections before the ld. DRP, New Delhi, against the Draft Assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. The ld. DRP had issued certain directions in the case. Therefore, after giving effect to the directions of the ld. DRP, the earlier adjustment of Rs. 6,91,26,651/- as proposed by the TPO u/s 92CA (3) remained unchanged. 4. Subsequently, the assessee has preferred appeal before the ITAT. In the letter dated 11.04.2023, the assessee raised the issue before the ITAT that in the Order Giving Effect (OGE) given by the TPO in pursuance of directions of the ld. DRP, the TPO did not follow the DRP's directions. 5. The ld. DRP has given directions vide para no.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessee never furnished during the assessment proceedings the technical description of the services rendered to the AEs vs. non-AEs. (iii) The assessee never submitted any invoice by invoice comparison with AEs and third parties. 9. The ld. DR argued that based on the assessee's nonsubmission of documents/details, the TPO has made upward adjustments by rejecting the assessee's CUP method and adopted TNMM. The ld. DR argued that in earlier year, the assessee had established its case by submission of the invoices to AEs as well as non-AEs of the services rendered (as mentioned in the order of the Tribunal for AY 2011-12) and established comparison of the same. But in the instant case for F.Y. 2017-18, the assessee has not submitt....