ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. ADANI ENTERPRISES LIMITED, AHMEDABAD
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ D ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR
PER MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, AM:
The present appeal is filed by the Revenue, challenging the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as “(CIT(A)”], under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] for the assessment year 2018-19, arising out of the order of the Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred to as “AO”] passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(3) and Section 144B of the Act. Asst. Year : 2018-19
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, Adani Enterprises Ltd., engaged in the business of trading various commodities, filed its return of income for the relevant assessment year, declaring an income of Rs.23,43,45,310/-. The case was selected for scrutiny, and an assessment order was passed under section 143(3), making two additions, including an addition of Rs.1,12,17,629/- on account of Transfer Pricing (TP) adjustments related to the purchase of coal. Aggrieved by this, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A), which deleted the said adjustment.
The Revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal, challenging the order of the CIT(A) on several grounds, primarily related to the deletion of the TP adjustment and the disallowance of Rs.49,11,450/- under section 37 of the Act. The Revenue has raised the following grounds in this appeal:
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) was justified in deleting the adjustment/addition of Rs. 1,12,17.629/- on account of the purchase of coal by violating provisions of section 92(3) of the Act. 1961?
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in allowing benefit of transactions where assessee has imported coal at a price lower than the market value which is contrary io the provisions of section 92(3) of the Income Tax Act?
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in allowing benefit of transactions where assessee has imported coal at a price lower than the market value for the benchmarking under CUP without appreciating the fact that aggregation of the transactions is not allowed in the CUP method which is contrary to the provisions of the Rule 10B of Income Tax Rules?
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that aggregation of the transactions is considered in CUP method without appreciating the fact that each transactions is treated and benchmarked separately? Asst. Year : 2018-19
3
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying upon the decision of Hon'ble ITAT Pune Bench, in the case of M/s Henkel Adhesive Technologies India (P) Ltd V/s DCIT without appreciating the fact that the facts of the decision of Pune Tribunal is different from the case of assessee as in case of M/s Henkel Adhesive Technologies India (P) Ltd V/s DCIT, Hon'ble Tribunal held that assessee had submitted various factors proving necessity for such transactions at the higher prices and in present case assessee had not submitted /raised any such details/contentions?
Before going to the merit of the cases, the Authorised Representative (AR) for the assessee at the outset submitted that tax effect on the disputed total additions is below Rs.60 lakhs, therefore, by virtue of recent CBDT Asst. Year : 2018-19
However, it is noted that in case on re-verification at the end of the AO, it can be demonstrated that the tax effect is more, or Revenue’s case falls within the ambit of exceptions provided in the Circular, then the Department will be at liberty to approach the Tribunal for recall of this order. Such application should be filed within the time period prescribed in the Act. In view of the above, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect.
In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 03rd October,2024 at Ahmedabad. (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER अहमदाबाद/Ahmedabad, िदनांक/Dated 03/10/2024 टी.सी.नायर, व.िन.स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS आदेश की #ितिलिप अ$ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ% / The Appellant 1. #&थ% / The Respondent. 2. संबंिधत आयकर आयु' / Concerned CIT 3. आयकर आयु' अपील
( ) / The CIT(A)-13, Ahmedabad िवभागीय #ितिनिध आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण राजोकट/DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad, 5. , , गाड" फाईल /
Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स&ािपत #ित //// सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt.
