a) Assessee allotted shares to its foreign holding company (AE) at a premium of Rs. 8,951 per share and received the amount against allotment of shares;
b) The AO referred this transaction to TPO for determining its ALP The TPO issued show cause notice to assessee;
c) The assessee contended that Chapter X doesn’t apply to issue of equity shares as no income arises from issue of equity shares and the transaction is a capital account transaction;
d) TPO rejected assessee’s contentions relying on retro amendment to section 92B made by the Finance Act,2012 by inserting Explanation(i)(c) and
(e) which brings capital financing transactions within the purview of international transactions and TP provisions of Chapter X;
e) The TPO determined ALP of shares and made TP adjustments of 1397.27 crores. The AO passed draft assessment order wherein he didn’t deal with assessee’s objections. Thus, the assessee filed the instant writ petition challenging AO’s draft assessment order.
The High Court disposed off the petition with following directions:
1) We were not inclined to set aside the draft assessment order of the AO or the order of the TPO and remand the matter to AO, because the AO has already filed an affidavit contesting the petition on merits and justifying the stand that the alleged shortfall in premium upon issue of shares was chargeable to tax under Chapter X.";
2) Thus, instead of remanding the matter to the AO to examine this question, the merits of this question must be considered by DRP;
3) The petitioner would submit before the DRP its preliminary objections to Draft Assessment Order and the TPO's order within two weeks by
raising jurisdictional issues;
4) The DRP would decide the issue of jurisdiction before considering issue of valuation raised by the petitioner in its objections filed before the DRP, of course subject to the additional grounds on jurisdiction being filed by the petitioner within two weeks;
5) The DRP would decide the issue of jurisdiction as a preliminary issue within two months from the date on which the petitioner filed its objections on the question of jurisdiction;
6) In case the decision of the DRP on the above preliminary issue was adverse to the petitioner, it would be open to the petitioner to challenge the order of the DRP on the preliminary issue in a writ petition if a case was made out at that stage that the decision of the DRP was patently illegal, notwithstanding the availability of alternative remedy of filing an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2013] 39 taxmann.com 201 (Bombay)
b) The AO referred this transaction to TPO for determining its ALP The TPO issued show cause notice to assessee;
c) The assessee contended that Chapter X doesn’t apply to issue of equity shares as no income arises from issue of equity shares and the transaction is a capital account transaction;
d) TPO rejected assessee’s contentions relying on retro amendment to section 92B made by the Finance Act,2012 by inserting Explanation(i)(c) and
(e) which brings capital financing transactions within the purview of international transactions and TP provisions of Chapter X;
e) The TPO determined ALP of shares and made TP adjustments of 1397.27 crores. The AO passed draft assessment order wherein he didn’t deal with assessee’s objections. Thus, the assessee filed the instant writ petition challenging AO’s draft assessment order.
The High Court disposed off the petition with following directions:
1) We were not inclined to set aside the draft assessment order of the AO or the order of the TPO and remand the matter to AO, because the AO has already filed an affidavit contesting the petition on merits and justifying the stand that the alleged shortfall in premium upon issue of shares was chargeable to tax under Chapter X.";
2) Thus, instead of remanding the matter to the AO to examine this question, the merits of this question must be considered by DRP;
3) The petitioner would submit before the DRP its preliminary objections to Draft Assessment Order and the TPO's order within two weeks by
raising jurisdictional issues;
4) The DRP would decide the issue of jurisdiction before considering issue of valuation raised by the petitioner in its objections filed before the DRP, of course subject to the additional grounds on jurisdiction being filed by the petitioner within two weeks;
5) The DRP would decide the issue of jurisdiction as a preliminary issue within two months from the date on which the petitioner filed its objections on the question of jurisdiction;
6) In case the decision of the DRP on the above preliminary issue was adverse to the petitioner, it would be open to the petitioner to challenge the order of the DRP on the preliminary issue in a writ petition if a case was made out at that stage that the decision of the DRP was patently illegal, notwithstanding the availability of alternative remedy of filing an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2013] 39 taxmann.com 201 (Bombay)
No comments:
Post a Comment