9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 1063 - AT - Income TaxTP adjustment towards payment of central services - inter group services - HELD THAT - The assessee has submitted evidences not only demonstrating the rendition of central services but also commensurate benefits derived from such services to the assessee. The assessee has done the bench marking analysis similar to AY 2015-16 and 2016-17 for the year under consideration also and therefore the impugned issue is squarely covered by the above decision of the coordinate bench and therefore respectfully following the same we direct the AO/TPO to delete the addition made towards inter group services. Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - AR submitted that the assessee s suo-moto disallowance is appropriate and scientific - HELD THAT - For the year under consideration assessee has investments the details of which has already been furnished before the AO. As noticed that that AO has applied Rule 8D without having recorded his satisfaction or examining the nature of investments whether they have yielded any exempt income or not. Therefore respectfully following the above decision of the coordinate bench in assessee's own case we delete the disallowance made by the assessing officer. Disallowance of ESOP expenditure - ESOP expenses has not crystalised and that the same is capital in nature - HELD THAT - As decided in assessee own case 2023 (3) TMI 1376 - ITAT MUMBAI we hold that the addition made by the AO towards ESOP expenses be deleted.
Issues Involved:
1. Transfer Pricing Adjustment for Payment of Central Services 2. Disallowance under Section 14A 3. Disallowance of ESOP Expenses 4. Excess Levy of Interest under Section 234B & 234D 5. Initiation of Penalty under Section 270A 6. Final Order of Assessment Issued without DIN Summary of Judgment: 1. Transfer Pricing Adjustment for Payment of Central Services: The assessee, Unilever India Exports Limited (UIEL), paid Central Services Charges to its AE, Unilever Plc, and benchmarked the transaction using the CUP method. The TPO rejected the assessee's method and determined the ALP at NIL, leading to an adjustment of Rs. 11,65,31,532/-. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had provided substantial documentation demonstrating the rendition and benefits of the services. The Tribunal found that the TPO's determination was not based on any prescribed method and was contrary to the mandate of section 92C. The Tribunal, following its earlier decisions, directed the deletion of the TP adjustment. 2. Disallowance under Section 14A: The AO disallowed Rs. 1,83,83,273/- under section 14A, stating the assessee's suo-moto disallowance was inadequate. The Tribunal observed that the AO had not recorded any cogent satisfaction for rejecting the assessee's calculation and had mechanically applied Rule 8D. The Tribunal, following its earlier decisions, deleted the disallowance made by the AO. 3. Disallowance of ESOP Expenses: The AO disallowed Rs. 1,47,50,000/- towards ESOP expenses, claiming they were not crystallized and were capital in nature. The Tribunal, referencing its earlier decisions and the Karnataka High Court's ruling in Biocon Ltd., held that ESOP expenses are allowable under section 37(1) and directed the deletion of the addition. 4. Excess Levy of Interest under Section 234B & 234D: The Tribunal directed the AO to reconsider the facts and rectify any errors in the calculation of interest under sections 234B and 234D after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity to be heard. 5. Initiation of Penalty under Section 270A: The Tribunal did not provide a separate adjudication for this ground as it was consequential. 6. Final Order of Assessment Issued without DIN: The assessee raised a legal issue regarding the assessment order being issued without a Department Identification Number (DIN). The Tribunal noted that since the issues were decided on merits in favor of the assessee, this legal issue became academic and was left open. Conclusion: The appeals for AY 2017-18 and 2018-19 were allowed, with the Tribunal directing the deletion of the TP adjustment, disallowance under section 14A, and ESOP expenses. The AO was instructed to rectify the errors in the calculation of interest under sections 234B and 234D. The legal issue regarding the assessment order without DIN was left open due to the favorable decisions on merits.
|
