TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 1671
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sted for working capital intensities vis-a-vis assessee's margin for the reason that the above would be relevant only in the event of assessee's working capital being negative. 2.2. Having regard to the Hon'ble ITAT 'C' Bench's decision in the case of Mobis India Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 2112/Mds/2011 wherein it is held that "the assessee has not been able to justify the adjustments that were required to be made on account of negative working capital", the DRP ought have upheld the action of the TPO/AO in rejecting the claim of adjustment for Working Capital Adjustment. 3. For these and other grounds that may be adduced at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the order of the Hon'ble DRP may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer restored. The assessee also filed cross-objections against the appeal of the Revenue which is numbered as 179/Mds/2016. 2.0 Condonation of delay: There was delay of 51 days in filing the appeal by the Revenue and the assessing officer filed an Affidavit explaining the reasons for delay and requested for condonation of delay. We heard both the parties and Ld.AR did not make any objections for condonation of delay. We are....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....strative expenses 12375156 Depreciation 21141655 Operating cost (B) 329809108 Profit before interest and Tax (PBIT) C= (A-B) 4628553 Add: Depreciation (D) 21141655 EBITA (Profit after adjusting depreciation) (E) 25770208 Add: Power related adjustment (G) 1760487 Adjusted operating profit (F = C+D+E+F+G) 27530695 Profit on Sales % G= (F/A*100) 8.23% Add: Adjustment towards longer credit term on supplies received as compared to comparable companies 2.02% Total Adjusted operating margin 10.25% The TPO has reworked the PLI after excluding the adjustments made by the assessee in it's TP study in respect of Depreciation, Power related adjustments, working capital adjustments, Risk adjustments and Forex gain related adjustments and the PLI worked out to 0.97% as against the assessee's working of 10.25%. Hence the TPO made independent search process and selected the final set of comparables as under: Final set of comparables: S. No. Name of the companies PLI (OP/OI) 1 Kalyani Forge Ltd. 5.55% 2 Imperial Auto Industries Ltd. 6.76% 3 Pricol Ltd. 2.87% 4 Dynamatic Technologies ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ference to dispute resolution panel. ^13144C. (1) The Assessing Officer shall, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act, in the first instance, forward a draft of the proposed order of assessment (hereafter in this section referred to as the draft order) to the eligible assessee if he proposes to make, on or after the 1st day of October, 2009, any variation in the income or loss returned which is prejudicial to the interest of such assessee. (2) On receipt of the draft order, the eligible assessee shall, within thirty days of the receipt by him of the draft order,- (a) file his acceptance of the variations to the Assessing Officer; or (b) file his objections, if any, to such variation with,- (i) the Dispute Resolution Panel; and (ii) the Assessing Officer. (3) The Assessing Officer shall complete the assessment on the basis of the draft order, if- (a) the assessee intimates to the Assessing Officer the acceptance of the variation; or (b) no objections are received within the period specified in sub-section (2). (4) The Assessing Officer shall, notwithstanding anything con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ile of DRP and the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. 7.0 The cross-objections fled by the assessee on various issues including the selection of comparable company M/s. Dynamatic Technologies Ltd. 7.1 In the assessee's own case, for the AY 2010-11 in ITA No. 658/Mds/2015 of this Tribunal, the Tribunal directed the AO/TPO to select only automobile segment of M/s. Dynamatic Technologies Ltd. as comparable or any other suitable company whose activities and characteristics are identical and similar to that of the assessee company. For ready reference, we extract the relevant paragraphs of the ITAT Orders: 6. The learned Departmental Representative on the other hand argued in support of the orders of the Revenue. 7. We have heard both the parties and carefully perused the materials available on record. Considering the arguments of the learned Authorized Representative, we find merit in the same because comparable companies should have identical or similar activities and characteristic of similar qualities, size and nature. The assessee company is only engaged in the manufacturing activity of automobile products such as water pump assembly and oil pump....