Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Iot Engineering & Construction ... vs Asst Cit 15(2)(1), on 6 January, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES "K", MUMBAI Before Shri G S Pannu, AM & Shri Amit Shukla, JM SA No. 410/Mum/2016 (Arising out of ITA No.6820/Mum/2016 For Assessment Year 2009-10) IOT Engineering & Construction Services Limited (Earlier known as IOT Design & Engineering Limited) Plot No.Y2, Near Nahur Railway Station, Off Ceat Tyre Road, Bhandup (W), Mumbai - 400 078 PAN AABCI7624L Vs. The Assistant CIT 15(2)(1), Mumbai (Applicant) (Respondent) Applicant By : Shri Jiger Saiya Respondent By : Shri T A Khan Date of Hearing :06.01.2017. Date of Pronouncement : 06.01.2017 O R D E R Per Amit Shukla, JM:
By the aforesaid stay application, the assessee seeks for stay of outstanding demand of Rs.1,25,02,400/-, which is mainly arising out of transfer pricing adjustment made by the TPO and confirmed by the DRP.
2. Before us, the learned counsel submitted that the transfer pricing adjustment of Rs.3,47,57,933/- has been made mainly on account of non-grant of transactional level adjustment relief which has been done by the TPO at the entity level. If the adjustment is restricted to the transactional level then the adjustment would be only Rs.71 lacs and in that case, there would be no outstanding demand. It has also been informed by him that a petition for rectification u/s.154 has been filed before the DRP in this regard way back in September 2016, however, till date no rectification has been carried out.
3. On the other hand, the learned DR submitted that some demand should be paid till the disposal of the appeal after considering the aforesaid submissions and prima facie merits of the case. For the purpose of stay petition, we find that the major demand arises out of the fact that transfer pricing adjustment of Rs.3.48 crores has been made mainly on account of selection of one comparable and that too it has been applied at the entity level. If such an adjustment is made on international transaction with the AE, then it has been stated that such an adjustment would be reduced substantially and, consequently, there would be no enforceable demand. In view of this fact alone, we find that the balance of convenience is in favour of the assessee for granting stay of demand. Accordingly, we stay the outstanding demand for a period of six months or till the passing of the order, whichever is earlier. Looking to the fact that the issues involved are quite simple and after discussing with the parties, the appeal of the assessee is being heard on priority basis and the same is fixed for hearing on 27th March 2017. The Registry is directed to fix the appeal as a stay granted matter on 27th March 2017. The issuance of notice is dispensed with as the date fixed for hearing of appeal has been pronounced in the open court.
6. In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is allowed Order pronounced in the open court on this 6th day of January, 2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
(G S Pannu) (Amit Shukla)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mumbai, Dated : 6th January, 2017.
SA
Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1.
The Applicant.
2.
The Respondent.
3.
The CIT(A), Mumbai.
4.
The CIT
5.
DR, 'K' Bench, ITAT, Mumbai
BY ORDER,
//True Copy//
(Assistant Registrar)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai
3
SA No.410/Mum/2017
IOT Engineering & Construction Services Limited