RADISYS INDIA PVT. LTD.,BANGALORE vs. ITO,

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1548/BANG/2013Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 July 2016AY 2005-0614 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

For AY 2005-06, the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh decision on penalty proceedings. For AY 2006-07, the Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal regarding Section 10A deduction, upholding the CIT(A)'s order. The assessee's appeal on transfer pricing was also restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The appeals concerned the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07. The revenue challenged the CIT(A)'s decision to initiate penalty proceedings without adequate satisfaction and the exclusion of reimbursement expenses from total turnover for Section 10A deduction. The assessee challenged the selection of comparables in transfer pricing adjustments.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty proceedings were validly initiated and whether reimbursement expenses should be excluded from total turnover for Section 10A deduction. The key issue in the assessee's appeal was the validity of comparable selection in transfer pricing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 10A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCH ‘A’, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI A. K. GARODIA & SMT ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN

For Appellant: Shri Mahaveer C Jain, CA
For Respondent: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT

in the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) has not decided these objections, we feel it proper to restore this matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for a fresh decision and accordingly, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and restore the entire matter in respect of TP issue back to his file for a fresh decision in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to both sides.

16.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the AY: 2005-06 is allowed for statistical purposes.

13 IT(TP)A Nos.1548-49 & 1663-64(B)2013

17.

In the combined result, the appeal of the revenue for AY: 2006-07 is dismissed and the remaining one appeal of the revenue and two appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →