2025 (8) TMI 293

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....that the assessee company, Jones Lang Lasalle Property Consultants (India) Private Limited, is a related entity to JJL Group which is a financial and professional services firm specializing in commercial real estate services and investment management. The assessee company is engaged in providing real estate consultancy, brokerage, design and construction of office interiors and project management services in India. The assessee company filed its return of income for AY 2020-21 on 08.01.2021and the same was selected for scrutiny under CASS to examine the following issues: 1. High Value International Transactions 2. Difference in ICDS adjustment reported in Form 3CD and ITR 3. Reduction in Profit due to ICDS application 4. Deemed income u/s 41 on account of written off debts 5. Loss/gain from currency fluctuations 6. Claim of large refund 7. Deduction under Chapter VI-A 8. Default in TDS 9. Foreign Outward Remittance Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 29.06.2021. Later on the case was referred to the NFAC u/s 144B of the Act. The 'International Transactions' being one of the reasons, the case was subsequently referred to the Transfer Pricing Officer....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essment proceedings which culminated in the Impugned Order are illegal and void in as much as the same are in breach of section 153 of the Act. 6. Without prejudice to above, directions issued by Ld. DRP are in contravention of section 144C(8) and therefore invalid. Grounds relating to transfer pricing issues 7. Ld. AO/TPO/DRP have erred in making an addition of 369,62,68,083/- to total income of Appellant on account of adjustment to arm's length price ("ALP") for international transactions entered by Appellant with its Associated Enterprises. 8. Ld. ΑΟ/ΤPO/DRP have erred, in law and in facts: 8.1 Claiming that reference is made to Ld. TPO but not providing details/ copy of such reference to enable one to ascertain whether reference is as per law. 8.2 in not accepting economic analysis undertaken by the Appellant in accordance with the Act, conducting a fresh economic analysis for determination of ALP and holding that Appellant's impugned international transactions are not at arm's length. 8.3 in not furnishing all the relevant details of economic analysis performed by Ld. TPO, in gross violation of principles of natural justice. 8.4 in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... or findings or reference is mentioned basis which addition is made relying on the intimation issued by CPC under section 143(1) of the Act. 11. Ld. AO has erred in making addition basis intimation issued by CPC without adjudicating disputed additions and erred in taking contradictory stand by adopting income u/s 143 (1) as starting point for purpose of computation of income pursuant to order under section 143(3). 12. Ld. AO erred in not issuing show-cause notice prior to making addition based on the adjustments made to the returned income in the intimation issued under section 143(1) of the Act which is against the principles of natural justice. 13. Ld. AO has erred in making addition amounting to Rs. 6,34,06,415/- without appreciating that the said amount has already been disallowed by the Appellant in the ITR form, thus leading to double disallowance. 14. Ld. AO/ DRP has erred in computing the total income basis the Intimation dated 28.12.2021 issued under Section 143(1) of the Act, without validating the erroneous adjustments made therein. 15. Ld. AO has erred in allowing the credit of tax deducted at source ('TDS') only to the extent of INR 1,65,13,08,947/- w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ough electronic mode, the same happens seamlessly and accordingly, the receipt of the said document also becomes instantaneously. Hence, the date of receipt of DRP direction also happened on 07.04.2022 itself and the due date in terms of section 144C(13) would start reckoning from that date. Merely, because the NeAC had retained the document receipt from ld DRP in the form of DRP directions for few months in its kitty and the later transfer the same to the assessment unit on 02.05.2022, the due date in terms of section 144C(13) of the Act for framing the final assessment order by the ld AO does not get automatically extended. Hence, we have no hesitation to hold that the final assessment order ought to have been passed by the ld AO on or before 31.05.2022 in the instant case. Since, the same was done on 30.06.2022 which is barred by limitation. Accordingly, ground Nos. 2 and 3 raised by the assessee are allowed. Since, the entire final assessment is quashed as barred by limitation the adjudication of other grounds becomes academic in nature and they are left open." 8.2 Further reliance was placed on the following cases: i) Order of the Tribunal in ITA No,1628/Del/2022 dated 19.0....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....und of appeal no.3 challenging final assessment order dated 30.07.2024 under Section 143(3) read with section 14C(13) read with section 144B is time barred having been passed beyond time limit under Section 14C(13) of the Act for completion of assessment. 11. Comparative table of vital events and dates in cases of Haier Appliances (I) Pvt. Ltd., Microsoft Corporation (India) Pvt. Ltd., Nokom India (P) Ltd. and Honda T & D (India)m Pvt. Ltd. and the directions of Ld. DRP issued directions under Section 144(c)(5) of the Act is as under: Sr. No. Events Haier Appliances (I) Pvt. Ltd. Microsoft Corporation (I) Ltd. Nikon India (P) Ltd. Honda R & D (I) Pvt. Ltd. Present 1. Direction of DRP u/s. (C)5 26.11.2021 25.03.2022 17.03.2022 08.04.2022 31.05.2024 2. DRP Order recorded by JAO. 30.11.2021 07.04.2022 02.05.2022 18.05.2022 31.05.2024 3 Final Assessment 31.01.2022 30.06.2021 30.06.2022 30.06.2022 30.07.2024 4. Limitation Endson 31.12.2021 31.05.2022 31.05.2022 31.05.2022 30.06.2024 12. In the context of faceless assessment process time and place of dispatch and receipt of electronic document ( in this case DRP order) is required to be ascertained by....