M/S. TE CONNECTIVITY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO TYCO ELECTRONICS SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, APPEALS -14, LTU, BANGALORE

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “The grounds mentioned herein are without prejudice to one another. General Ground 1 . The order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) — 14, is bad in law and liable to be quashed. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, we raise the following grounds: Upward adjustment on account of professional charges of Rs 1,05,101 and contract receipts of Rs 13.119 887 based on Form 26AS. 2. The Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the upward adjustment on account of professional charges of Rs 105.101 and contract receipts of Rs 13.119.887 on the basis of Form 26AS. 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that the Company did not have any business income during the year due to transfer of its Energy Trade and Export business vide business transfer agreement dated September 23. 2010 with Raychem RPG Private Limited (`RRI.; or 'the purchaser') on a going concern basis and the sale was with effect from September 23. 2010. 4. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact the Company had agreed to provide transitional services for and on behalf of RRL during the transition period as per the Business Transfer Agreement and the revenue (if any) pertains to RRL and might have erroneously been reflected in Form 26AS of the Company 5. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact no such receipts are reflected in the bank statement of the Company for the relevant year under consideration 6. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that post effective date of scheme of amalgamation. all the profit or revenues earned in relation to the transferred business is taxable

The Assessee also filed additional evidence, which is confirmation letter from Raychem RPG Pvt. Ltd. where they confirmed as follows:- 9. “We enclose the confirmation from Raychem RPG Pvt. Ltd., as additional evidence for your Honours’ kind consideration along with detailed reasons as to why the said additional evidence should be admitted, supported by the relevant case laws. These documents have a significant bearing on the appeal before your Honours and are relevant for the disposal of this appeal.”

Admission of additional evidence under Rule 29. The assessee filed additional evidence and also application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules. After considering the petition, in our opinion, there is good and sufficient reason in adducing additional evidence before us. Accordingly, the additional evidence is admitted for adjudication.

First ground is with regard to the upward adjustment on account of professional charges of Rs.1,05,101/- and contract receipts of Rs.1,31,19,887/- based on Form 26AS. the Ld. CIT(A) observed that the AO made an upward adjustment on account of

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. Now the contention of the assessee is that there is no income as reflected in Form 26AS statement. Some people used the assessee’s PAN wrongly and there is no income and there is no question of giving corresponding TDS credit. In our opinion, this is required to be examined after verifying with the person who remitted the TDS. Accordingly, we direct the AO to verify the issue in accordance with law with the person who has issued the TDS certificate in the name of the assessee. At the same time, we shall consider the additional evidence filed before us and decide the issue in accordance with law. The issue is remitted back to the file of the AO for fresh consideration.

Other grounds of the appeal raised by the assessee are not pressed before us and hence the grounds are dismissed as not pressed.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.