Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. The Ld. AR submitted that the issue of deduction u/s 10A was considered in assessment including by the TPO in detail while computing the arms length price during the transfer pricing proceedings and by the Assessing Officer during original assessment proceedings in most extensive manner and it cannot be said that there was error due to lack of application of mind in assessment which is evident from the plain reading of the impugned assessment order. All the aspects were considered as shown below and it may be appreciated that the TPO cannot determine ALP without going into these aspects as raised by the Commissioner of Income Tax in notice as well as order u/s 263. The TPO considered comparable companies which obviously would mean that he has seen the nature of product of the assessee and other comparable companies and functions performed by the assessee and comparable companies. The TPO recorded in the TP order that records have been kept as per rule 10D which means that comprehensive records have been kept and were examined by the TPO. The TPO considered audit report in form no. 3CEB. A copy of Computation of Income and Acknowledgment of Return claiming deduction u/s 10A and the part of balance sheet showing export of Software and software development expense were considered in original assessment by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer also considered the Audit Report u/s 10AA showing various aspects of the deduction u/s 10A and also this fact that the claim u/s 10A was not new in this year but since last 7 years, this deduction was being claimed. The submissions of assessee were also filed before the TPO explaining the nature of business, nature of undertaking and details about ALP. The order of the TPO determining ALP mentioning that records as per rule 10D and other details asked were submitted and taken on record and regarding export of software no adverse inference is drawn by the TPO. The submissions filed before the Assessing Officer by the assessee, explained about the nature of export business of the assessee, nature of undertaking, note on section 10, foreign inward remittance certificate, software export return, EEFC account, foreign exchange gain, reason for high profit and role of Dr. Anil Gupta. The copies of Softex and other details and forms showing the various facets of the impugned transactions were also submitted during the original assessment proceedings. The Ld. AR relied upon the following case laws: