TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (12) TMI 459
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sued by the ld. DRP. 2. Grounds of appeal taken by the assessee read as under :- "1. On the facts, in circumstances of the case & in law, the final assessment order passed by Ld. Assessing Officer ('Ld.AO') of the National Faceless Assessment Centre ('NaFAC') under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') is bad in law and void ab initio. 1.1. On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the draft assessment order dated April 15, 2021 is barred by limitation as prescribed under Section 153 of the Act; 1.2. On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. AO erred in passing the draft assessment order without ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f interest on outstanding receivables does not arise in the year under consideration. 5. On the facts, in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in levying interest under section 234A of the Act disregarding the fact that return of income was filed under section 139 (1) of the Act within the due date specified therein." 3. The assessee, Boeing India Private Limited (BIPL) was incorporated on 9th March, 2017 i.e. during Financial Year 2016-17 for the purpose of providing market information, knowledge support services, technical publication services, engineering design services to its Associated Enterprises (AEs) on cost plus markup basis. Further, the assessee submitted that it had not undertaken any business ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the instant case, it would result in double taxation of same amount. 2. It is submitted that the Boeing Corporation merged with the Appellant pursuant to a scheme of merger approved by the Regional Director having an appointed date of 1 April 2017. The scheme of merger was duly filed with Registrar of Companies on 15 February 2018 and was approved by RoC on 27 February 2018, w.e.f. 15 February 2018 (kindly refer page no 93 and 106 of Paper book). 3. The Appellant also wishes to highlight that the above fact was already discussed, communicated and the relevant documents were filed with the jurisdictional officer of the Appellant (kindly refer page no 91 - 92 of Paper book). 4. Thus, since Boeing Corporation merg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lready discussed, communicated and the relevant documents were filed with the jurisdictional officer of the Company. (Refer page no 93 and 106 of Paper Book) 9. Considering the above, it may be noted that since the merger scheme had the appointed date as 1 April 2017, the Appellant ought to be assessed as a standalone entity (i.e., before merged for the subject year (i.e. FY 2016-17) being the first year of incorporation. 10. Additionally, it is submitted that if such addition is confirmed in the instant case, same would result in double taxation of said amount on two occasions. 11. It is humbly prayed that since the impugned TP transaction of INR 21,52,899 does not pertain to the Appellant (i.e. BIPL), the same i....