M/S. PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED (SUCCESSOR TO ERSTWHILE PHILIPS SOFTWARE CENTRE PVT. LTD.),KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T.(TRANSFER PRICING) - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 32 & 33/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2004-05 M/S. Philips India Limited Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax 3Rd Floor, Tower A Vs (Transfer Pricing-Ii), Bangalore [Presently Deputy Dlf Park, 08 Block Af Commissioner/Assistant Major Arterial Road Commissioner Of Income-Tax New Town Transfer Pricing 2, Kolkata Kolkata - 700156 [Pan : Aabcp9487A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ketan K. Ved, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/03/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Even Dt. 15/11/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. The Sole Issue Raised In Both The Appeals Is Relating To The Maintainability Of The Appeals Before The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Rectification Orders Passed By The Transfer Pricing Officer (In Short “Tpo”) U/S 154 R.W. Sub-Section (5) To Section 92Ca Of The Act. The Ld. Cit(A) Vide Impugned Orders Has Dismissed The Appeals Of The Assessee Holding That As Per The Provisions Of Section 246A Of The Act, Order U/S 92Ca Or Its Rectification Order U/S 154 Of The Act Passed By The Tpo Is 2

154. [(1) With a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record52 an income-tax authority referred to in section 116 may,— (a) amend any order52 passed by it under the provisions of this Act ; [(b) amend any intimation or deemed intimation under sub-section (1) of section 143;]] [(c) amend any intimation under sub-section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND SPONGE AND IRON PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

section 68 of the Act\nBefore the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides\nwere purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that\nafter the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would\nPage 17\nbe resold to same parties in substance therefore the transaction was more

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND SPONGE AND IRON PRIVATE LIMITED , PATNA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

section 68 of the Act\nBefore the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides\nwere purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that\nafter the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would\nPage 17\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

section 68 of the Act\nBefore the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides\nwere purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that\nafter the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would\nbe resold to same parties in substance therefore the transaction was more in the\nnature

NARAYAN BARTER PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-6(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 154 of the Act, which allows for the correction of any mistake apparent from the record in the assessment order. It is clarified that this procedure is intended to address mathematical or clerical discrepancies without affecting the substantive findings of the assessment. The assessee may submit a written application to the AO providing the relevant details and supporting

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

section 68 of the Act Before the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides were purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that after the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would Balmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24 Balmukund Cement

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

section 68 of the Act Before the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides were purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that after the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would Balmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24 Balmukund Cement

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

section 68 of the Act Before the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides were purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that after the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would Balmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24 Balmukund Cement

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND SPONGE AND IRON PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

section 68 of the Act Before the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides were purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that after the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would Balmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24 Balmukund Cement

GOPAL & SONS HUF,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 32(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

section 68 of the Act Before the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides were purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that after the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would Balmukund Lease Fin Private Limited; A.Y. 15-16 to 18-19, 23-24 Balmukund Cement

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND LEASE FIN PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

section 68 of the Act\nBefore the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides\nwere purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that\nafter the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would\nPage 17\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited

BALMUKUND SPONGE & IRON PVT. LTD.,,PATNA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

section 68 of the Act\nBefore the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides\nwere purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that\nafter the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would\nPage 17\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND SPONGE AND IRON PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

section 68 of the Act\nBefore the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides\nwere purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that\nafter the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would\nPage 17\nbe resold to same parties in substance therefore the transaction was more

BALMUKUND SPONGE & IRON PVT. LTD.,,PATNA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

section 68 of the Act\nBefore the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides\nwere purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that\nafter the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would\nPage 17\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited

BALMUKUND SPONGE & IRON PVT. LTD.,,PATNA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

section 68 of the Act\nBefore the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides\nwere purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that\nafter the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would\nPage 17\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited

BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

section 68 of the Act\nBefore the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides\nwere purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that\nafter the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would\nPage 17\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited

BALMUKUND SPONGE & IRON PVT. LTD.,,PATNA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

section 68 of the Act\nBefore the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides\nwere purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that\nafter the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would\nPage 17\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BALMUKUND CEMENT & ROOFINGS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

section 68 of the Act\nBefore the Commissioner (Appeals) it as submitted by the assessee that raw hides\nwere purchased from the four parties under consideration on the understanding that\nafter the hides were processed and the finished leather was produced the same would\nPage | 17\nBalmukund Lease Fin Private Limited