Case Law Details
Case Name : Doshi Accounting Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Appeal Number : ITA No(s) No. 1352/Ahd/2011
Date of Judgement/Order : 24/10/2019
Related Assessment Year : 2006-07
Courts :
All ITAT ITAT Ahmedabad
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored
Doshi Accounting Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Transfer Pricing: ITAT held that even if an assessee is eligible for tax exemption at the rate of hundred percent under section 10A/10B of the Act, then also the arm’s length price on international transactions deserve to be determined under section 92C of the Act.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
These four appeals have been filed at the instance of the Assessee and Revenue against the separate orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-XIV, Ahmedabad [“Ld.CIT(A)” in short] relevant to Assessment Years 2006-07, 2007-08, & 2008-09.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Sponsored
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
To ADD:
It appears that, another similar instance is Philips Software case as covered in the Judgment of the Kar. HC ; which is one of the cited cases before the Spl. Bench in Doshi’s case. 2. Reliance placed by the Revenue on the decision in Aztec case has been rejected, rightly so, but on a limited ground; failing to appreciate that such a reliance is patently misconceived for more than one reason.
3. Among others, the point of dispute has been addressed by and on behalf of the assessee- appellant, and decided by the itat , mostly relying on the Proviso to sub-sec (4) of sec 90C.
However, it appears that, in doing so, –
a) the three crucial / fundamental concepts of “source”, “íncome” and ”total income” as envisage in the IT ACT have not been kept in full focus as warranted; AND
b) the overriding legal implications of the separate enactments, – sec. 10A, sec. 10 AA , sec. 10 B , and chapter VIA ,
have not been duly urged and addressed by the parties with due force; so much so have not been gone into in -depth by the itat as warranted.
It is to be expected that in the most possible further proceedings in the instant case, so also other similar cases, the foregoing aspects would be suitably stressed and forcefully addressed, by urging on the FIRST PRINCIPLES, for ensuring the desired favourable outcome.
It is hoped that the input supplied on the selected aspects will be found to be of assistance to anyone concerned; and help in making an independent study and forming an opinion- a better one at that, in order to serve the intended purpose of the COMMON GOOD !
IMPROMPTU
The question framed for the Spl. Bench to decide and the view the itat has taken have been set out in para. 2 and para 20. of the ORDER , respectively.
On a mindful reading and personal understanding of the entire Text of the ORDER, the ‘upward adjustment’ (as determined by the TPO and upheld by the DRP) of Rs 1,48, 23, 848 made in the assessment and included in the chargeable ‘income’ from the source of relevance (the STPI unit of the assessee – see para 3. of the Order) does not seem to have been specifically covered in the referred questions; hence, not been gone into and adjudicated upon by the Spl. Bench.
May have MORE to share !
OVER to….