A look at the assessment order, in respect whereof power under section 263 of the Act was exercised, would amply make it clear that the Assessing Authority did not at all make any endeavour to ascertain, whether Rs. 96 and odd crores were received by the assessee for and in respect of services rendered by the assessee or the same was received only by way of sale price of goods/materials sold by the assessee, may be outside India.
AO observed that the assessee has not included the excise duty in the valuation of closing stock. Under the provisions of section 145A of the Act, the assessee should include the excise duty component of purchase price of raw material while valuing closing stock of raw material, Work-in-Progress (WIP) and finished goods.
In Tax Appeal No. 9 of 2001, in addition to the above two questions with respect to the lease agreement, one more question is raised and that is relating to the allowing of the claim of expenditure on get together, picnic, coffee and tea of the employees and payment Club and expenses incurred for seminar as revenue as revenue expenses for the assessment year 1993-94 amount to Rs. 5,76,330/-which is, according to revenue, was not allowable as expenditure.
This issue is well established that determination of ALP can be made only with regard to international transactions of the assessee with its AE and it cannot be extended to international transaction of the assessee with its Non-AEs. Therefore, the ALP can be worked out only with respect to international transaction of the assessee with its AE. If it is so, it just and proper to restore this issue to the file of Assessing Officer with a direction to verify the calculations submitted by the assessee after giving the assessee reasonable opportunity of hearing and if the aforementioned calculations are correct then the difference being within the safe harbour of +/- 5 per cent, no addition with regard to ALP should be made.
Consideration as shown in the Registered Sale Deed cannot be equated with ‘Fair Market Value’, as defined in the Act u/s 2(22B) of the Act. /Therefore, adoption of average value of land at Rs. 27,030/- per acre as on 1.4.1981, as ‘Fair Market Value’ of the land in question, for the purpose of computation of capital gains, is not legally and factually tenable. ‘Fair Market Value’ represents the price that a seller is willing to accept and a buyer is willing to pay in the open market. The price or sale consideration as specified in the Registered Sale Deed of an asset in India represents the price or sale consideration negotiated or determined not in the open market but in the parallel operating market where such transactions crystallized in a clandestine manner. In view of this, sale consideration of an asset, as recorded in the Registered Sale Deed is generally understated and, hence, cannot he taken as ‘Fair Market Value’ as on 1.4.1981 for the purpose of computation of ‘Capital Gains’.
Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of P.K. Badiani v. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 642 observed that accumulated profits would mean profit in the commercial sense and not assessable taxable profits. In that case development rebate reserve created by the company by charging profit and loss account was held to be accumulated profits though the same was liable to be deducted as rebate.
With respect to the deduction u/s.194-I,the learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the land lady being a senior citizen has submitted Form 15G to the assessee declaring that no tax should be deducted on the rent paid to her when the taxable limit for taxation in her hand was to be Rs. 1,95,000.
The year of taxability of the capital gain in the case of development agreements came to be considered by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Chaturbhuj Dwarkadas Kapadia v. CIT [2003] 260 ITR 491. It is pertinent to note that the High Court also noted both clauses (v) and (vi) of sec. 2(47) extracted above in its decision.
The statute provides a right to the member or debenture-holder for inspection of the statutory registers and records as contemplated u/s 163 of the Act. The inspection is allowed to a member or debenture-holder without fee and any other person on payment of such sum as may be prescribed for each inspection. The member or debenture-holder is also entitled to the extracts from any Register, index or copy referred to in sub-section (1) of Section 163 of the Act without fee or additional fee as the case may be.
In this view of the matter, the estimation at 8% confirmed by the learned CIT(A) by deleting these additions and disallowances made u/ss.68 and 69 we hold 7% profit as reasonable to be taxable income on the gross receipts disclosed by the assessee in its financial statements.
