What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal as not pressed, based on the Revenue's submission. Consequently, the assessee's Cross Objection was also dismissed as infructuous.

The Revenue filed an appeal against the Dispute Resolution Panel's (DRP) direction to delete a Transfer Pricing adjustment. The assessee filed a Cross Objection against the Revenue's appeal. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-12 recommended not pressing the Revenue's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal against the DRP's order on Transfer Pricing adjustment should be pressed. The consequential effect on the assessee's Cross Objection.

ACIT vs Msci Services P.Ltd | ITAT Mumbai 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Lohia & Shri Nikhil Tiwari

For Respondent: Ms. Amrita Ranjan (CIT-DR), Shri M.P. Lohia & Shri Nikhil Tiwari

Hearing: 27/07/2018Pronounced: 31/07/2018

Heard together (2 matters)

CO NO. 43/MUM/2016

ITA No.992/Mum/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER G.S. PANNU, AM :

The captioned appeal by the Revenue is directed against the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel-III, Mumbai dated 30th November,

2 M/s. MSCI Services Pvt. Ltd. CO No. 43/Mum/2016 2015 to delete the Transfer Pricing adjustment whereas the assessee has filed its Cross Objection against the appeal filed by the Revenue against the directions of the DRP-III, Mumbai.

At the time of hearing, the ld. CIT-DR furnished a communication dated 26.07.2018 from Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-12, Mumbai communicating that the appeal of the Revenue may not be pressed. The relevant comments of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-12, Mumbai contained in the said communication read as under :-

“I have perused the MAP order. In the light of the order, I find that rate of profit (margin) accepted in MAP is still lower as compared to the same in A.Y. 2011-12. The DRP decided the application of the assessee determining profit margin at 32.73% in A.Y. 2011-12 as against 29.12% shown by the assessee. Though we have preferred appeal in ITAT against the order of the DRP but taking into consideration the fact that profit margin accepted in MAP for all the years that had been before the MAP, is not more than 32.73% decided by the DRP in A.Y. 2011-12 as reasonable, it will be not proper to press this issue in ITAT in A.Y. 2011-12. Therefore, in response to the letter of the CIT(DR), it may be communicated that appeal in A.Y. 2011-12 may not be pressed.”

In view of the above plea of the ld. CIT-DR, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not pressed.

So far as the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is concerned, the learned representative submitted that consequent to non-pressing of the appeal by the Revenue, the Cross Objection becomes infructuous and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Cross Objection is also dismissed.

3 M/s. MSCI Services Pvt. Ltd. CO No. 43/Mum/2016

Resultantly, the appeal of the Revenue as well as the Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed, as above.

Order pronounced in the open court on 31st July, 2018.

ACIT 12(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. MSCI SERVICES P.LTD, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments