DCIT,CIR - 2(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ITC INFOTECH INDIA LTD., KOLKATA
ITA 67/KOL/2015[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Oct 2019AY 2008-2009
Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.67/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit, Circle-2(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Itc Infotech India Ltd. 37, J.L Nehru Road, Kolkata – 700071. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaci7376Q (Appellant/Revenue) .. (Assessee ) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.485/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Itc Infotech India Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1), Kolkata 37, J.L Nehru Road, Kolkata – 700071. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaci7376Q (Assessee ) .. (Revenue) Appellant/Revenue By : Dr. P. K. Srihari, Cit(Dr) Assessee By : Shri J. P Khaitan, Sr. Adv. & Bikash Chanda, Fca सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/10/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: These Revenue’S & Assessee’S Cross Appeal For Assessment Year 2008-09 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - Vi, Kolkata Dated 24.10.2014 Passed In Case No.Tp-07/Cit(A)-Vi/R-2/2012-13/Kol Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. We Come To The Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.67/Kol/2015. Its First Substantive Ground Pleads That The Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Reversing The
For Appellant: Shri J. P Khaitan, Sr. Adv. & Bikash Chanda, FCAFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)
…emporaneous economic and market conditions on price- setting mechanism is also reflected in provisions of Rule 10B (4) of I.T. Rules. Hon'ble tribunal has also held in the decisions in the cases of M/s ST Microelectronics Private Ltd. vs. CIT(A)-XX, New Delhi 145 TTJ 553 (Del) and DCIT, Circle 1(2), Hyderabad vs. Deloitte Consulting India P. Ltd., Hyderabad 145 TTJ 549 (Hyd.) , that for purpose of section 92CA(3), the contemporaneous data relevant to the year under consideration, i.e. the current year data is to be used first and not multiple year data. 4.4. However, I find force in the appellant's objection agai…