Facts of the Case
The petitioner, a company engaged in software and information
technology enabled services, challenged a draft assessment order dated 24 April
2021 passed under Section 144C read with Sections 143(3) and 144B of the
Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer made a substantial adjustment of
₹25,58,68,79,196 to the total income of the assessee for Assessment Year
2017-18.
The case involved international transactions, prompting a
reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) under Section 92CA for
determination of the Arm’s Length Price (ALP). The TPO ultimately determined a
transfer pricing adjustment of ₹16,84,51,531. However, while framing the draft
assessment order, the Assessing Officer added a much larger amount relating to
the value of a demerged business, treating it as taxable income.
Issues Involved
- Whether
the Assessing Officer could determine or enhance ALP beyond the
determination made by the TPO.
- Whether
the AO could independently treat the value of a demerged business as
income without TPO’s determination.
- Whether
the impugned assessment order violated Section 92CA of the Income-tax Act.
- Whether
such action constituted a jurisdictional error.
Petitioner’s Arguments
- The
Assessing Officer acted beyond jurisdiction by computing ALP
independently.
- Section
92CA mandates that ALP determination falls exclusively within the domain
of the TPO.
- The
TPO never determined the value of the demerged business as ALP.
- The AO’s addition of ₹25,41,84,27,665 relating to the demerged business was therefore unlawful and contrary to statutory provisions.
Respondent’s Arguments
- The
AO acted in conformity with the TPO’s findings and analysis.
- The
TPO had examined the international transactions related to the demerger.
- Alternatively,
the matter could be remanded for fresh consideration if required.
Court Order / FINDINGS
- Determination
of ALP for international transactions lies exclusively within the
jurisdiction of the TPO under Section 92CA.
- The
Assessing Officer is bound to compute total income strictly in conformity
with the ALP determined by the TPO.
- The
TPO had determined an adjustment only to the extent of ₹16,84,51,531.
- The
AO’s addition relating to the demerged business, which was not determined
as ALP by the TPO, amounted to exceeding jurisdiction.
- The
AO effectively assumed the role of the TPO, which is impermissible under
the statutory scheme.
Important Clarification
- ALP
determination is the exclusive domain of the Transfer Pricing Officer.
- The
Assessing Officer cannot deviate from or expand upon the TPO’s
determination while computing income.
- Statutory
procedures under the transfer pricing regime must be strictly followed.
- Any
assessment order contrary to Section 92CA is liable to be set aside as
jurisdictionally defective.
Link to download the order – https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1772427204_MS.GIESECKEANDDEVRIENTINDIAPVT.LTD.VsDEPUTYCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAX2.1ORS.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment