Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range 12(5), Bangalore. ..... Respondent. Appellant By : Shri K. R. Pradeep. Respondent By : Shri Etwa Munda. Date of Hearing : 28.05.2012. Date of Pronouncement : 15.06.2012. O R D E R Per Shri Jason P. Boaz : This appeal is directed against the order of assessment dt.29.9.2011 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after referred as 'the Act') by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 12(5), Bangalore in accordance with the direction of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) u/s. 144(5) r.w.s. 144C(8) of the Act dt.26.9.2011. The Assessment Year involved is 200708. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are as under : 2.1 The assessee, a well known software company, with other lines of business, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 200708 on 31.10.2007 declaring income of 2 ITA No.972/Bang/11 Rs.531,20,99,354. The case was taken up for scrutiny by issue of notice under section 143(2) of the Act. In view of international transactions the assessee had with Associated Enterprises (AE), the case was referred to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) under section 92CA for determination of the arms length price (ALP) after obtaining the approval of the CIT. The Addl. Director of Income Tax (TP)II, Bangalore by order under section 92CA of the Act dt.15.4.2010 suggested Transfer Pricing adjustment of Rs. 9,67,89,370 on the issue of interest chargeable to its associated enterprises. In view of the transfer pricing adjustment, a draft order under section 144C of the Act was passed on 31.12.2010. The assessee company filed objections thereto before the DRP on 31.10.2011. The DRP vide directions dt.26.9.2011 referred to above did not accept the assessee's objections to the TP adjustment and directed the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment accordingly. The Assessing Officer accordingly passed the order of assessment on 29.9.2011. 3. In all the assessee company has raised 98 grounds. These will be disposed off in seriatum ground wise as under. 4. The grounds of appeal raised at S.Nos.1 to 4 are as under : " 1. The Order u/s 143(3) dated 29.09.2011 of the learned Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as "the AO"), the Order u/s 92CA dated 15.04.2010 of the learned Transfer Pricing Officer (hereinafter referred to as "the TPO") and the Directions dated 26.09.2011 issued u/s 144C(5) of the learned Dispute Resolution Panel (hereinafter referred to as "DRP") are against the law, facts, circumstances, natural justice, equity and all other known principles of law. 2. The Order issued by the learned AO as well as the directions of the learned DRP are violative of the principles of judicial discipline and are accordingly liable to set aside as the binding nature of the orders of the higher appellate authorities has been totally ignored. 3 ITA No.972/Bang/11 3. The directions of the learned DRP are unsustainable in law in as much as they have been issued in a mechanical manner without considering the relevant materials, evidences and data and without application of mind. Consequently, the additions based on such directions require to be deleted. 4. The total income computed and the total tax computed is hereby disputed." These grounds at S.Nos.1 to 4 are general in nature and therefore no separate adjudication is called for thereon. 5.1 The grounds of appeal at S.Nos.5 to 10 in respect of transfer pricing adjustments are as under : Transfer pricing adjustments " 5. The TPO erred in passing an Order dated 15042010 and serving the same on the assessee on 03112010 without providing an opportunity to the assessee to respond and also without considering the submissions made vide letter dated 25102010. 6. The learned AO erred in adding a sum of Rs. 9,67,89,370/ towards the transfer pricing