Dell International Services India Pvt. Ltd. Vs JCIT (ITAT Bangalore)
We find that before us, there are 3 grievances of the assessee. The first grievance is regarding assessee’s request for exclusion of comparable M/s. Comp-U-Learned Tech India Ltd. The second grievance is regarding assessee’s request for exclusion of CAT Technology Ltd. The third grievance of the assessee is regarding grant of risk adjustment. In repect of all these 3 issues, in the first round, the Tribunal restored the matter back to the file of AO/TPO with certain directions as noted above but in the order giving effect passed by the TPO, those directions of the Tribunal in the first round were in fact not given effect to by the TPO and when the assessee raised this issue before learned CIT(A), learned CIT(A) has simply upheld the order of AO/TPO on all these 3 issues in a cryptic manner without giving any valid reasoning. This is settled position of law that any quasi judicial authority should pass a speaking and reasoned order but in the present case, neither the TPO nor the learned CIT(A) has passed a speaking and reasoned order in the light of the direction of the Tribunal in the first round. We do not appreciate this approach of the AO/TPO and CIT(A) and we set aside the order of CIT(A) on all these 3 issues and restore the matter back to the file of AO/TPO for a fresh decision by way of a speaking and reasoned order on all these 3 issues as per the directions of the Tribunal in ITA No.948/Mds/2014 dated 06.11.2015.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
This appeal is filed by the assessee and the same is directed against the order passed by learned CIT(A)-5, Bengaluru, dated 25.10.2017 for Assessment Year 2009-10.
2. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under:
1. The learned Assessing Officer (‘learned AO’), learned Transfer Pricing Officer (‘learned TPO’) and the Honourable Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘CIT(A)’) grossly erred in determining an adjustment of INR 1,28,44,900/- with respect to the international transactions rendered by the taxpayer u/s 92CA of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
2. The learned AO/ learned TPO/ Hon’ble CIT(A) erred in accepting companies that ought to have been rejected as comparable:
