Home › Income-Tax Act › Dy .CIT v. Arjav Diamond India (P) Ltd ( 2020) 187 DTR 59/ 203 TTJ 771 ( Mum)( Trib)

Dy .CIT v. Arjav Diamond India (P) Ltd ( 2020) 187 DTR 59/ 203 TTJ 771 ( Mum)( Trib)

S. 271G : Penalty – Documents – International transaction – Transfer pricing –Failure to maintain documents – Levy of penalty is held to be not justified . [92C(1), 92CA, 92D, 92D(1)]

Assessing Officer alleging that the assessee has not maintained information/documents required under section 92D(1) r/w rule 10D for enabling him to determine the ALP, the Transfer Pricing Officer initiated proceeding for imposition of penalty under section 271G of the Act and ultimately imposed penalty for an amount of Rs  16,14,61,108/-.  CIT (A) deleted the penalty . On appeal by revenue  .   Tribunal affirmed the order of the CIT ( A) relying on following judgements  Dilipkumar v.  Lakhi, IT(TP)A no.2142/Mum./2017, dated 02.08.2018; Kiran Gems Pvt. Ltd., ITA no.5626/Mum./2016, dated 01.11.2018;CIT v. D. Navinchandra Exports P. Ltd., ITA no.6304/Mum./2016, etc. dated. 25.10.2017 , DCIT v Blue Star Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., ITA no.6553/Mum./2017, dated 13.06.2019 DCIT v. Leo Schachter Diamonds India P. Ltd., ITA no. 5931/Mum./2017, dated 28.02.2019; DCIT v. Laxmi Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., ITA no.2643/Mum./2017, dated 27.12.2018; and  DCIT v. Interjewel Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., ITA no.5628/Mum./2016, etc., dated 01.11.2018. (AY. 2012 .13)