PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 vs. M/S EXPEDITORS INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties. The following questions of law arise for consideration by the Court. (a) Whether the the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Tribunal”] misdirected itself in law and on facts in upholding the deletion of adjustments directed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, “CIT(A)”] vis-à-vis royalty? (b) Whether the Tribunal misdirected in law and on facts in not appreciating that the CIT(A), while admitting additional evidence, had not given an opportunity to the Assessing Officer/Transfer Pricing Officer to deal with the matter placed on record? ITA 698/2023

We may also note that insofar as the proposed question (E) is concerned, Mr Sanjay Kumar, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/assessee, says that the same is covered against the appellant/revenue via the judgment dated 16.12.2011 rendered in ITA 1088/2011, titled Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s Expeditors International (India) Pvt. Ltd. 2011:DHC:6479-DB, by the coordinate Bench . The proposed question (E) is set forth hereafter: “E. Whether on the facts and under circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT is justified in upholding the order of CIT(A) is deleting the disallowance of Global Account Manager Expenses and lease line expenses paid without deleting tax in view of section 40(a)(i) of Income Tax Act?”

Thus, no substantial question of law arises, insofar as the aforesaid proposed question of law is concerned. 4. List the matter on 23.02.2024.