TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 1323
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3(3) r.w.Section 144C(3) r.w. Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18 and 2018-19 respectively. 1. That the final order passed by the Ld Assessing Officer ('AO"), Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre ('NaFAC) giving effect to the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) and the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel ('DRP") is bad in law and erroneous on the facts & circumstances of the appellant, as the order has been passed on a non-existent entity, which is infructuous, void ab initio & bad in law and is prayed to be quashed. 2. That the Ld. AO of NaFAC& the Ld. TPO and consequently the L4. DRP have grossly erred in law a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntly the Ld. DRP have grossly erred in law and on facts of the appellant's case in selecting the following new comparables which have dissimilar functional, product, industry profiles and FAR analysis as compared to the appellant (being a CHQ alley or non-alloy steel wire rods/ wires manufacturer) and do not meet the comparability criteria as prescribed under Rule 10B(2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 ("the Rules') and their selection is therefore bad in law and on the appellant's facts a) Thane Steels Ltd. b) Maithan Steel & Power Ltd. c) DP Wires Ltd. d) R K Wire Products Ltd. e) Cords Cable Inds. Ltd. f) Vishal Cables Pvt. Ltd. g) Khandelwal Cables Ltd. h)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rm's length price, without providing cogent reasons. 9. That the Ld. TPO and consequently the Ld. AO of NaFAC have grossly erred in law and in the circumstances of the appellant by initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act for underreporting of income in consequence of misreporting of income, which is bad in law and void-ab-initio. 10. That each ground is independent and without prejudice to other grounds raised herein. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee arguing on Ground No. 1 submitted that the order impugned has been passed on non-existing entity and relying on the ratio laid down in the case of Maruti Suzuki Ltd. reported in TS-429-Hon'ble Supreme Court- 2019-TP] Civil Appeal No. 5409of 2019 (ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s corroborated from the documents produced in the Paper Book Page No. 153 to 154 and 210 to 212. The DRP was also duly intimated time and again in respect of the said throughvarious documents filed before the DRP which are reproduced at 368 to 394 and 410 to 413. (The Assessee has also filed an affidavit before us by confirming the above facts). However, in the DRP direction dated 26/05/2022, TPO order giving effect to DRP direction dated 21/06/2022 as well as in the Final Assessment order dated 22/07/2022, the authorities below passed respective orders in the name of Kadimi Special Steels Pvt. Ltd./amalgamating Company, which was ceased to be exist as on the date. 7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki (supra) hel....