Time limit u/s 92CA (3A) being mandatory, no transfer pricing adjustment sustainable on time barred TPO order

Brief of the Case

ITAT Delhi held In the case of Honda Trading Corporation. vs, DCIT that despite the use of the word `may’, the time limit for passing the order by the TPO is mandatory, as in the otherwise situation of the TPO having been allowed more time by implication, say of three months or more, could at that time have frustrated the provisions of section 153 for the passing of the assessment order by the AO. Thus we have no hesitation in holding that the use of the word `may’ in sub-se

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.