9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 1834 - AT - Income TaxTP Adjustment - Addition towards upward adjustment made under section 92CA in respect of transaction of sales of finish goods - computation of arm's length price in relation to international transactions entered into by the assessee with associated enterprise - Transaction benchmarked on TNMM basis - HELD THAT - The comparison has to be based on real transactions of similar nature, if at all such transactions have taken place. When no such transactions have taken place, as is the case before us, there is obviously no occasion of any comparison. The stand taken by the DR therefore, is not only quite detached from commercial reality but also wholly untenable in law. In any case, what can be examined on the touchstone of arm's length principles is the commercial transaction itself, as a result of which the debit balance has come into existence, and the terms and conditions, including terms of payment, on which the said commercial transaction has been entered into. In this view of the matter DR's reliance on Aztec decision 2007 (7) TMI 50 - ITAT BANGALORE is of no assistance to the case of the revenue. The international transaction is exports of goods which has been benchmarked on TNMM basis and which is duly accepted by the TPO. In view of these discussions, and respectfully following the decision of the coordinate bench in assessee's own case for the earlier years 2018 (5) TMI 1895 - ITAT AHMEDABAD , we uphold the grievance of the assessee and direct the AO to delete the impugned ALP adjustment. - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Upward adjustment under section 92CA for sales of finished goods. 2. Charging of interest on delayed realization of sales invoices. 3. Application of the Transitional Net Margin Method (TNMM) as the Most Appropriate Method (MAM). 4. Classification of sales transactions and receipt of payment from debtors as international transactions. 5. Use of comparable interest rates and the LIBOR rate for notional interest. 6. Differences in transit periods for international and domestic sales. 7. Determination of the arm's length interest rate. Detailed Analysis: 1. Upward Adjustment under Section 92CA: The assessee contested the addition of ?79,13,290/- towards upward adjustment made under section 92CA concerning sales of finished goods. The TPO had considered the delay in realization of sales invoices as an extension of a loan to the associated enterprise and applied the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method to determine the interest rate. However, the assessee argued that the TNMM, which takes into account all costs, including working capital and interest costs, was the most appropriate method. The Tribunal found that the issue was covered by a previous decision in the assessee's favor, where similar upward adjustments were deleted. 2. Charging of Interest on Delayed Realization of Sales Invoices: The TPO proposed an upward adjustment for the delay in realization of sales invoices, treating the outstanding receivables as loans to the associated enterprises. The TPO applied an interest rate based on the LIBOR plus a margin for forex risk. The assessee argued that it did not charge interest on outstanding balances from either associated or non-associated enterprises and that the TNMM method already accounted for such costs. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee, referencing a previous decision that held no separate adjustment for notional interest was required once TNMM was accepted. 3. Application of TNMM as Most Appropriate Method (MAM): The assessee applied the TNMM method, which was accepted by the TPO. The TNMM considers the net margin level of the entity, including all costs such as notional interest on receivables. The Tribunal upheld that once TNMM is accepted, no further adjustment for notional interest is required. This was consistent with the Tribunal's earlier decisions in similar cases. 4. Classification of Sales Transactions and Receipt of Payment from Debtors as International Transactions: The assessee contended that while sales transactions were international, the receipt of payment from debtors was not an international transaction. The Tribunal noted that the Finance Act, 2001-02, with retrospective effect from April 1, 2002, included receivables within the ambit of international transactions. However, the Tribunal found that the upward adjustment was not justified as the TNMM method already accounted for such costs. 5. Use of Comparable Interest Rates and the LIBOR Rate for Notional Interest: The TPO used the CUP method and external comparables to determine the interest rate, adding a margin for forex risk. The assessee argued that any interest should be charged at the LIBOR rate only. The Tribunal found that the TPO's method was not appropriate once TNMM was accepted, and no separate adjustment for notional interest was required. 6. Differences in Transit Periods for International and Domestic Sales: The assessee highlighted that the transit periods for delivery of goods to different associated enterprises varied significantly and that a common benchmarking of invoice dates and transit periods was unjustified. The Tribunal agreed that such differences should be considered and that the TNMM method already accounted for these variations. 7. Determination of the Arm's Length Interest Rate: The TPO determined the arm's length interest rate by applying a base rate (LIBOR) plus a margin for forex risk. The Tribunal found that this approach was not necessary once the TNMM method was accepted, as it already included all relevant costs. The Tribunal referenced previous decisions where similar adjustments were deleted. Conclusion: The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, deleting the upward adjustment of ?79,13,290/- made by the TPO. The Tribunal's decision was based on the acceptance of the TNMM method, which accounted for all costs, including notional interest on receivables, and referenced previous decisions on similar issues. The Tribunal found no justification for separate adjustments once TNMM was accepted, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee.
|
