SANJIB BANERJEE,J. - (1.) The Revenue seeks to assail an order of the Appellate Tribunal of May 8, 2014 pertaining to two aspects thereof: the ground of speculative transaction as raised by the assessing officer and upheld by the Dispute Resolution Panel: and, the date which has to be reckoned for the purpose of determining the arm's length price in a contract with an associate concern.
(2.) As far as the second issue is concerned, not much has been said on behalf of the Revenue, particularly since the Dispute Resolution Panel accepted the assessee's contention that it is the rate indicated in the contract which has to be compared to the rate prevailing on the date of the contract rather than the rate prevailing when the invoice is raised. The Appellate Tribunal has merely endorsed the view taken by the DRP. Since it is a possible view taken after considerable deliberation and justified with reasons, the Appellate Tribunal's endorsement of such view of the DRP does not call for any reconsideration.
(3.) As far as the speculation transaction aspect is concerned, it appears that the assessee did not honour its commitment to take delivery against some purchase orders placed on foreign sellers consequent upon the price of palm oil declining. The assessee, however, accepted the foreign sellers' claims for damages and settled the matter and claimed the same as a loss.;