2018 (9) TMI 2162

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g from records are: The assessee is engaged in providing design engineering and ITeS services to its AEs. During the period relevant to assessment year under appeal, the assessee entered into international transactions with its AEs. To examine arms length price (ALP) of the international transactions reference was made to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO). The TPO after analysing the transactions proposed adjustment of Rs. 72,79,939/-. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer passed assessment order making addition of the aforesaid amount and also initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Penalty of Rs. 22,49,501/- u/s. 271(1)(c) was levied by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....03.2015, the Assessing Officer has mentioned pre-conditions for levying penalty and also the charge for levying penalty. The ld.DR further contended that mere non-mentioning of 'Explanation-7' in the penalty order, would not make penalty proceedings invalid or defective. 6. We have heard the submissions made by representatives of rival sides and have perused the orders of Authorities below. The Revenue in appeal has assailed the findings of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) in deleting penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. It is an undisputed fact that penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) were initiated in respect of adjustment proposed by the TPO in proceedings u/s. 92C of the Act. 7. For initiating any penalty proceedings u/s. ....