Case Law Details
DCIT Vs Ratnakala Export Pvt Ltd (ITAT Mumbai)
The only substantial issue that has to be decided is whether the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the penalty levied under section 271G, the other grounds being ancillary to this. From the facts of the case, it is evident that the Assessee has furnished the necessary details for determination of the arm’s length price though (ALP) was unable to provide segment-wise profit & loss account of the AE segment and the non AE segment since the Assessee did not maintain separate books of account for AE & non AE segments. Apart from this, the Assessee has complied with the TPO’s requirement.
ITAT held considering the practical difficulties involved in furnishing the segmental details of AE transactions and non-AE transactions, penalty under Sec. 271G could not be justifiably imposed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A)-57, Mumbai dated 31/05/2017 deleting the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer under section 271G of the I.T. Act for assessment year 201213. The grounds of appeal are as follow:-
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
