Ita/538/2016 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Sumitomo Corporatoin India Pvt. Ltd

$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 538/2016 & CM No. 27788/2016 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocate along with Mr. Puneet Rai, Advocate. versus SUMITOMO CORPORATOIN INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO O R D E R% 19.09.2016 –This court notices that the appeal is hopelessly time barred by 890 days. The explanation given and heard cannot be termed as constituting “sufficient cause” requiring condonation of delay. The court also notices that in addition to the delay, the revenue had appealed against an earlier order in respect of a similar direction by the ITAT, for AY-2009-2010 (in ITA No. 83/2015 decided on 05.05.2015). The court had upheld the decision even while requiring the TPO to take into consideration rule 10(B) of the Income Tax Rules while carrying out the ACP exercise. The court had in the assessee’s appeal (ITA No. 381/2013, decided on 22.07.2016) also held in addition that an appropriate method would be TNMM. In the circumstances, having regard to the similarity of all necessary facts, the TPO is hereby directed to follow the directions of this court for AY 2009-2010 contained in both the appeals of the assessee and the revenue as well. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J V. KAMESWAR RAO, J SEPTEMBER 19, 2016 sapna