APTEAN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BANGALORE
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed
ITA 422/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2023AY 2017-18
Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 422/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Aptean India Pvt. Ltd., 1/2, 8Th Floor, Level 5, The Assistant Golden Heights, Commissioner Of 59Th C Cross Road, Income Tax, 4Th M Block, Circle – 1(1)(1), Rajajinagar, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 010. Pan: Aaacc5890M Appellant Respondent : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee By Advocate : Shri Praveen Karanth, Cit- Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-01-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 25/03/2022 Passed By Nfac, Delhi For A.Y. 2017-18 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Herein By The Appellant Are Without Prejudice To One Another General Ground 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Final Assessment Order Passed By National Faceless
For Respondent: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar
Section 143(3)Section 92D
section 92D of the Income-tax Act,
1961 ('the Act') read with rule 10D of the Income-tax Rules,
1962 ('the Rules') on the ground that the appellant did not apply appropriate filters and accordingly contended, that the data used in computing arm's length price (ALP') is not reliable or correct.
4. On the facts and circumstances