PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI- 9 vs. M/S YKK INDIA PVT. LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court found no prejudice to either party in the ITAT's decision to remit the matter back to the TPO for further examination. The court agreed that the case required further appraisal by the TPO.
What were the facts?
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) remitted the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for a fresh decision, allowing additional evidence. The ITAT considered that similar issues in earlier years did not lead to objections by the revenue.
What were the issues?
Whether the ITAT was justified in remitting the matter to the TPO for fresh consideration, including admission of additional evidence. Whether the TPO's order required further examination given the facts and circumstances.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Rule 29
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citration Number : 2023/DHC/000023
ITA 540/2022 & connected appeals. Page 1 of 4
$~62 & 64 to 66 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decision delivered on: 19.12.2022 + ITA 540/2022 & CM No.54841/2022
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 9 ..... Appellant Through: Mr Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel and Mr Vipul Agrawal and Mr Parth Semwal, Jr. Standing Counsels.
versus
M/S YKK INDIA PRIVATE LTD.
..... Respondent
Through: None.
+ ITA 542/2022 & CM No.54844/2022
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI- 9..... Appellant Through: Mr Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel and Mr Vipul Agrawal and Mr Parth Semwal, Jr. Standing Counsels.
versus
M/S YKK INDIA PVT. LTD
..... Respondent
Through: None.
+ ITA 543/2022 & CM No.55078/2022
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – 9 ..... Appellant Through: Mr Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel and Mr Vipul Agrawal and Mr Parth Semwal, Jr. Standing Counsels.
versus
M/S YKK INDIA PVT. LTD
..... Respondent
Through: None.
Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:04.01.2023 16:14:16 Signature Not Verified
Neutral Citration Number : 2023/DHC/000023
ITA 540/2022 & connected appeals. Page 2 of 4
+ ITA 544/2022 & CM No.55186/2022
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI- 9..... Appellant Through: Mr Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel and Mr Vipul Agrawal and Mr Parth Semwal, Jr. Standing Counsels.
versus
M/S YKK INDIA PVT. LTD
..... Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL): CM No.54841/2022 in ITA 540/2022 CM No.54844/2022 in ITA 542/2022 CM No.55078/2022 in ITA 543/2022 CM No.55186/2022 in ITA 544/2022 [Applications filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 465 days in re-filing the appeals] 1. These are the applications moved on behalf of the appellant/revenue seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeals. 1.1. According to the appellant/revenue, there is a delay of 465 days. 2. For the reasons given in the applications, the delay is condoned. 3. The above-captioned applications are, accordingly, disposed of. ITA 540/2022 ITA 542/2022 ITA 543/2022 ITA 544/2022
These appeals are directed against the common order dated 22.10.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:04.01.2023 16:14:16 Signature Not Verified
Neutral Citration Number : 2023/DHC/000023
ITA 540/2022 & connected appeals. Page 3 of 4
“Tribunal”]. 4.1 The Tribunal, by way of a brief order, has remitted the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) with a direction to decide the issues afresh, after consideration of the evidence filed by the assessee. 5. Furthermore, the TPO has been directed to give a hearing in the matter to the authorized representative of the assessee. The direction for remand was prefaced with the Tribunal invoking Rule 29 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 [in short, “Rules”]. Accordingly, in exercise of the power vested under the said Rule, additional supporting evidence was admitted by the Tribunal, with a view that it required appraisal by the TPO. 5.1 It also appears that, while exercising its power to remit the matter to the TPO, the Tribunal took into account the fact that the issues which had been raised on merits before it, obtained in earlier assessment years as well, in which, no objection was raised or disallowance ordered by the Assessing Officer (AO)/TPO. 6. Thus, having regard to the fact that the assessee was under a bona fide belief, in view of similarity of issues, that it need not file documentary evidence, the Tribunal, as noted above, remitted the matter to the TPO. 7. We have looked at the record, with the assistance of Mr Zoheb Hossain, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue. 8. Mr Hossain, cannot but accept that the matter may require further examination by the TPO, notwithstanding the fact that the impugned order is rather cryptic. 9. In our view, no prejudice will be caused to either side if the matter is remitted to the TPO, as directed by the Tribunal. 10. Therefore, these appeals are closed without prejudice to the rights and Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:04.01.2023 16:14:16 Signature Not Verified
Neutral Citration Number : 2023/DHC/000023
ITA 540/2022 & connected appeals. Page 4 of 4
contentions of the parties.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
TARA VITASTA GANJU, J
DECEMBER 19, 2022
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:04.01.2023 16:14:16 Signature Not Verified
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026