2017 (5) TMI 1586 - HC - Income Tax

TPA - comparable selection - Held that - Finding of the comparable to be adopted to determine the ALP as the basis of the activity conducted by the respondent-assessee is essentially a finding of fact. The view taken by the Tribunal is a reasonable and possible view. Moreover it has not been shown us to be in any manner perverse. Thus the question as raised does not give rise to any substantial questions of law

Summary

Issues:
Common question of law and facts involving the same assessee, related to the Arms Length Price adjustment of import of raw material and spares from associated enterprises, and restoration of issues to CIT(A).

Analysis:
1. The High Court admitted the appeal and framed substantial questions of law regarding the adjustment of Arms Length Price (ALP) of import of raw material and spares. The court questioned the justification of the Tribunal for not adjusting the ALP amount from the assessee's income under Section 92C. The court also raised concerns about the restoration of issues to CIT(A) despite a specific finding of a mistake apparent under Section 154.

2. The appellant's counsel argued that the AO's order should not have been disturbed by the tribunal, emphasizing the specific adjustment made to the ALP of import of raw material and spares. The counsel contended that the tribunal erred in its decision against the department.

3. The respondent's counsel relied on the decisions of the Bombay High Court in similar cases to support the tribunal's findings. Citing cases like Commissioner of Income Tax vs. General Atlantic (P) Ltd., the counsel argued that the tribunal's selection of comparables for determining ALP is a factual finding and not perverse. The court found the tribunal's view reasonable and not giving rise to any substantial questions of law.

4. Referring to another case, Commissioner of Income Tax-3 vs. Goldman Sachs (India) Securities (P) Ltd., the respondent's counsel highlighted the consistency in the tribunal's approach in selecting comparables for ALP determination. The court upheld the tribunal's decision based on the comparables used, similar to previous cases, and found no reason to interfere with the tribunal's order.

5. Ultimately, the High Court ruled in favor of the assessee and against the department, dismissing the appeals and upholding the tribunal's decision. The court directed a copy of the order to be placed in each file, concluding the judgment.

This detailed analysis covers the key legal arguments, findings, and decisions made by the High Court in the given judgment involving the adjustment of Arms Length Price and restoration of issues related to the same assessee.