Magic Software Enterprises India Pvt. Ltd., 9/12, Tara Icon, Mumbai Pune Road, Wakadewadi, Pune 411003 .... ��यथ� / Respondent PAN: AA BCM2443B ��या�ेप सं./CO No.97/PUN/2014 �नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 200708 (out of ITA No.1 801/PUN/2013) Magic Software Enterprises India Pvt. Ltd., 9/12, Tara Icon, Mumbai Pune Road, Wakadewadi, Pune 411003 ... ��या�ेपक/ Cross objector PAN: AABCM2443B Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 11(1), Pune .... ��यथ� / Respondent Assessee by : S/Shri Arun Chhabra & Ajay Kering Revenue by : Shri Suhas Kulkarni सुनवाई क� तार�ख / घोषणा क� तार�ख / Date of Hearing : 23.01.2017 Date of Pronouncement: 31.01.2017 2 ITA No.1801/PUN/2013 CO No.97/PUN/2014 Magic Software Enterprises India Pvt. Ltd. आदे श / ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM: The appeal filed by the Revenue is against the order of CIT(A)IT/TP, Pune, dated 31.07.2013 relating to assessment year 200708 against the order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). The assessee has also filed Cross Objections against the appeal of Revenue. 2. The appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. The Cross Objections filed by the assessee are time barred by 26 days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay along with an affidavit of the Director of assessee, wherein it is pointed out that the Cross Objections against the appeal filed by the Revenue were delayed because of appointment of Senior Counsel for representing the case. We find merit in the plea of the assessee in this regard and condone the delay and admit the Cross Objections and proceed to decide the present appeal. 4. The assessee has also filed an application for admission of additional Cross Objections which read as under: "A. The ld. Assessing Officer erred in law, on facts and in circumstances of the case in reopening assessment under section 148 of the Act based on an order passed by the Transfer Pricing Officer u/s 92CA of the Act which was void authorities below initio B. The ld. Transfer Pricing Order passed under section 92CA(3) of the Act was without jurisdiction since it was issued on the basis of an incorrect reference made by the Assessing Officer without there being any pending assessment proceedings. 3 ITA No.1801/PUN/2013 CO No.97/PUN/2014 Magic Software Enterprises India Pvt. Ltd. Without prejudice, the transfer pricing adjustment made as per the order passed under section 143 read with section 147 of the Act is invalid being made in pursuance of a transfer pricing order which was bad in law". 5. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that the additional Cross Objections merits to be admitted as it is purely legal issue and the facts relating to the same are already on record. Reliance was placed on the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in National Power Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC). We find merit in the plea of assessee and admit the additional Cross Objections raised by the assessee. The said additional Cross Objections raised by the assessee are against reopening of assessment under section 148 of the Act, which goes to the root of the assessment made against the assessee. Hence, we proceed to decide the additional Cross Objections first. Both the assessee and the Revenue have filed appeals against respective porti