Charging of interest under section 234B and 234D and rate of depreciation differ asset to asset

Last updated: 08 August 2013

Court :
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Brief :
The Ld. DRP and the Ld. AO (following the directions of the Ld. DRP), erred both on facts and in law in confirming the addition to the extent of Rs. 3,83,76,374/- to the income of the appellant out of the total addition of Rs.5,49,44,194/- as proposed by the Ld. TPO/A.O. in its draft assessment order u/s 143(3) read with section 144C by holding that its international transactions do not satisfy the arm’s length principle envisaged under the Act. In doing so, the Ld. DRP and the Ld. AO has grossly erred in agreeing with and upholding the Ld. TPO’s action – including certain companies that are not comparable to the appellant in terms of functions performed, assets employed and risks assumed and doing so has selected certain companies whose activities are in no way similar to appellant’s characterization (as business support Services/ Marketing Support Services Provider) by the Ld. TPO himself.”

Citation :
Actis Advisers Pvt. Ltd. Mira The Corporate Suites, Block D, Ground Floor 1 & 2, Ishwar Nagar, New Delhi-110065. PAN/ GIR No. AAACC 5281 G ( Appellant ) Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax, Range-1, New Delhi. ( Respondent )