Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

14. For the assessment years 2007-08 to 2010-11 also, the assessee has raised identical additional grounds which were raised for the assessment year 2006-07 in ITA No. 5232/Del/2010. Therefore, our findings given in the former Microsoft India (R&D) Pvt. Ltd.

part of this order shall apply mutatis mutandis for the assessment years 2007-08 to 2010-11.

15. The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the very outset stated that for the assessment years 2007-08 to 2009-10, the TPO considered the "residuary profit split method" as most appropriate method instead of TNMM method. However, for the assessment year 2010-11, the TPO again considered the TNMM method as most appropriate method by following the Circular of the CBDT No. 6/2013 dated 29.06.2013. It was submitted that the matter may be restored to the TPO for application of the most appropriate method by considering the guidelines issued by the CBDT in Circular No. 6/2013 dated 29.06.2013 which was not available when the TPO passed his order for the assessment years 2007-08 to 2009-10. It was further submitted that the TPO asked the information u/s 133(6) of the Act in respect of the comparables choosen by him but those informations were not confronted to the assessee and that the comparables were choosen on the basis of the information collected u/s 133(6) of the Act and without giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee while selecting the comparables. It was submitted that the opportunity was to be given to the Microsoft India (R&D) Pvt. Ltd.

assessee and than only a view has to be taken by the TPO as to whether the comparable selected by him were to be considered or not.

16. In his rival submissions the ld. CIT DR supported the orders of the authorities below and further submitted that if at all the case is to be set aside than it is to be considered afresh by the TPO/AO. However, he admitted that the TPO for the assessment years 2006-07 & 2010-11, considered the TNMM method as most appropriate method but only for the assessment years 2007-08 to 2009-10, the "residuary profit split method" was considered as most appropriate method. He also could not rebut this contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the informations collected u/s 133(6) of the Act relating to the selected comparables were not confronted to the assessee.

17. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the material available on the record. In the present case, it is noticed that the TPO applied the residuary profit split method as most appropriate method instead of TNMM method choosen by the assessee as most appropriate method. It is also noticed that the TPO for the assessment year 2010-11 had Microsoft India (R&D) Pvt. Ltd.