IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.4432/Mum/2024 (Assessment year: 2020-21)

WNS Global Services Private vs Assessment Unit, National Faceless Limited, Mumbai Assessment Centre, New Delhi PL-10/11, Gate No.4, Godrej- Boyce Complex, Pirojshanagar, L.B.S.Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400 079 PAN: AAACW2598L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : ShriPorus Kaka A/w Manish Kanth Respondent by : Shri Pankaj Kumar (CIT DR)

Date of hearing : 29/04/2025 Date of pronouncement : 05/05/2025

O R D E R

Per Anikesh Banerjee (JM):

This appeal of the assessee is directed against the final assessment order passed by the Assessment Unit, Income-tax Department (for brevity the “Ld.AO”) under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) read with section 144B of the Act (for brevity the “the Act”), date of order 18/06/2024 for A.Y. 2020-21.The said order was originated from the recommendation of the CIT (DRP-2), Mumbai-2 (for brevity the “Ld.DRP”), date of order 03/05/2024 passed under section 144C(5) of the Act.

2. The assessee has taken the following grounds:-

“Based on the facts and the circumstances of the case, WNS Global Services Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'Appellant') respectfully craves leave to prefer an appeal under Section 253 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act') against the order passed by the Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre ('AO') dated 18 June 2024 ('Final Assessment order") in pursuance of the directions issued by Dispute Resolution Panel-2 (DRP), Mumbai dated 3 May 2024 (DRP Directions") on the following grounds which are independent and without prejudice to each other.

General Ground

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO based on the directions of the Hon'ble DRP has erred in determining the total taxable income of the Appellant for Assessment Year ('AY") 2020-21 at Rs 332,27,26,586 instead of Rs 306,52,54,200 as returned by the Appellant for the subject AY under normal provisions of the Act.

Final assessment order barred by limitation.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the final assessment order dated 18 June 2024 passed by the Assessing Officer, having been passed beyond the limitation provided in terms of section 144C read with 153 of the Act, is time-barred, bad in law, void ab initio and is liable to be quashed.

Validity of final assessment order

3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the final assessment order dated 18 June 2024 passed by the Assessing Officer under section 144C(13) without giving effect to the binding directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel ("DRP') is bad in law and is liable to be quashed.

Transfer Pricing Grounds

4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in making a reference of the Appellant's case to the learned TPO and then making a transfer pricing adjustment of INR 11.26,24,233 to the income of the Appellant for AY 2020-21.

5. The learned AO/TPO has erred in incorporating a partial disallowance of depreciation (INR 4,30,31,547) in his order passed for the year under consideration based on an adjustment proposed to the value of business and commercial rights purchased by the Assessee from its Associated Enterprise ('AE') in AY 2011-12, contrary to the binding directions of the Hon'ble DRP and/or binding rulings of this Hon'ble Tribunal in the Appellant's own case.

6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned TPO/AO has erred computing notional interest of INR 6,95,92,686 basis the erroneous characterisation of its share purchase transaction as loan in the transfer pricing order for AY 2016-17 and AY 2017-18, contrary to the binding directions of the Hon'ble DRP and/or binding rulings of this Hon'ble Tribunal in the Appellant's own case.

7. Without prejudice, on the fact and in circumsta