Section 92D, read with section 271AA, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and rule 10D, of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 - Transfer pricing

IT/ILT : Where clause by clause documentation required under rule 10D, had been maintained by assessee in respect of international transactions with AEs, levy of penalty under section 271AA was not justified
■■■
[2014] 52 taxmann.com 205 (Mumbai - Trib.)
IN THE ITAT MUMBAI BENCH 'K'
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-10 (1), Mumbai
v.
Kodak Graphic Communication India Ltd.*
N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
IT APPEAL NO. 7152 (MUM.) OF 2012
[ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08]
OCTOBER  29, 2014
Section 92D, read with section 271AA, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and rule 10D, of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 - Transfer pricing - Maintenance of accounts and documents (Comparables and adjustment - Penalty) - Assessment year 2007-08 - Assessee-company, wholly owned subsidiary of a foreign company, had international transactions with its AE - Assessee had filed its audit report in Form No. 3 CEB, highlighting international transaction and had also done benchmarking of arm's length price in relation to said transaction - Assessee had also complied with all notices sent by Transfer Pricing Officer and clause by clause documentation required under rule 10D had been made by assessee - Whether, on facts, penalty under section 271AA could be imposed on assessee - Held, no [Para 7][In favour of assessee]