2021 (10) TMI 1392 - AT - Income Tax

TP Adjustment - Comparable selection - HELD THAT - Assessee is engaged in providing Business support services thus companies functionally dissimilar with that of assessee need to be deselected. Cedit of advance tax - We restore this issue to the file of AO to examine the claim of the assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Transfer Pricing (TP) Adjustment
2. Short Credit of Advance Tax
3. General Grounds and Consequential Matters

Detailed Analysis:

I. Transfer Pricing Adjustment:

I.1 Inclusion of Comparable Company:
The assessee contended that the TPO/AO did not include Impressario Event Management India Pvt. Ltd. as a comparable company, despite the DRP's direction. The Tribunal directed the AO/TPO to include Impressario Event Management India Pvt. Ltd. in the final set of comparables.

I.2 Exclusion of Comparable Companies:
The assessee sought the exclusion of Asian Business Execution & Conferences Ltd. and ICC International Agencies Ltd. The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not raise a specific ground for Asian Business Execution & Conferences Ltd. and thus declined to entertain this contention. However, following the decision in ALCON Laboratories India Pvt. Ltd., the Tribunal directed the exclusion of ICC International Agencies Ltd. from the final set of comparable companies due to its functional dissimilarity.

I.3 Inclusion of Additional Comparable Companies:
The assessee sought the inclusion of EDCIL (India) Ltd., ICRA Management Consulting Services Ltd., and Indus Technical & Financial Consultants Ltd. The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not press for Indus Technical & Financial Consultants Ltd. and restored the examination of EDCIL (India) Ltd. and ICRA Management Consulting Services Ltd. to the AO/TPO for fresh analysis.

I.4 Reversal of Provision:
The assessee argued that the reversal of provision should be considered as operating in nature. The Tribunal agreed, directing the AO to include the reversal of provision amounting to Rs.6,03,728/- as operating in nature.

I.5 Penalty under PF Act:
The assessee contended that the penalty paid under the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act should be considered non-operating in nature. The Tribunal disagreed, holding that the penalty is linked to the business activities and should be considered as operating expenses.

I.6 Working Capital Adjustment:
The DRP did not grant working capital adjustment due to lack of details. The Tribunal restored this issue to the AO/TPO, allowing the assessee to furnish necessary details for examination.

I.7 Risk Adjustment:
The ground relating to risk adjustment was not pressed by the Ld. D.R.

I.8 +/- 5% Variation:
The issue of considering +/- 5% variation while computing the arm's length price was restored to the AO/TPO for examination.

II. Short Credit of Advance Tax:
The assessee claimed short credit of advance tax amounting to Rs.10 lakhs. The Tribunal restored this issue to the AO for examination.

III. General Grounds and Consequential Matters:
Other grounds raised by the assessee were either general in nature or consequential and did not require specific adjudication.

Conclusion:
The appeal filed by the assessee was treated as allowed for statistical purposes, with various issues being restored to the AO/TPO for fresh examination or suitable directions being issued by the Tribunal. The order was pronounced in the open court on 28th Oct, 2021.