9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (8) TMI 627 - AT - Income TaxTP adjustment - AMP expenditure computed in the hands of the assessee by adopting bright line test - HELD THAT - As this issue has been considered in assessee s own case for A.Y. 2017-18 2023 (7) TMI 1138 - ITAT BANGALORE wherein as established that determination of arm's length price of AMP expenditure by applying BLT method is not valid. In a catena of decisions, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. 2015 (12) TMI 634 - DELHI HIGH COURT while disapproving the decision of Hon ble Delhi Special Bench in L.G. Electronics India (P.) Ltd. 2013 (6) TMI 217 - ITAT DELHI have held that, BLT method is invalid as it is not prescribed in the statute. Also in absence of an express arrangement/agreement between the assessee and the AE for incurring AMP expenditure to promote the brand of the AE, AMP expenditure incurred by making payment to third parties for promoting and marketing the product manufactured by the assessee, does not come within the purview of international transaction - we direct the Ld.TPO to delete the adjustment made towards the AMP. Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance of deduction claimed u/s. 80G - HELD THAT - As relying on Sling Media (P.) Ltd 2021 (12) TMI 762 - ITAT BANGALORE we direct the Ld.AO to verify the payments made by assessee towards CSE that also forms part of deduction u/s. 80G. AO then shall grant the deduction claimed u/s. 80G in accordance with law.
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the assessment order. 2. Transfer Pricing (TP) matters related to Advertising, Marketing, and Promotion (AMP) expenses. 3. Disallowance of deduction under section 80G. 4. Incorrect levy of interest under section 234B. 5. Initiation of penalty proceedings under section 274 read with sections 270A and 271AA. Summary of Judgment: 1. Validity of the Assessment Order: The assessment order framed under section 143(3) read with sections 144C(13) and 144B was challenged as being "bad in law" and "contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case." However, this ground was considered general in nature and did not require adjudication. 2. Transfer Pricing Matters: - AMP Expenses Adjustment: The Tribunal noted that the issue of AMP expenditure had been considered in the assessee's own case for A.Y. 2017-18. The Tribunal reiterated that the "bright-line test" (BLT) is not a valid method for determining AMP expenses as an international transaction. The Tribunal emphasized that AMP expenditure incurred by the assessee for its own business in India should not be considered an international transaction unless there is an express arrangement with the AE. - Economic Ownership and DEMPE Functions: The Tribunal found no evidence that the AMP expenses were intended to benefit the AE or constituted a service to the AE. The expenses were incurred for the business of the assessee in India. - Comparability Analysis: The Tribunal directed the deletion of the adjustment made towards AMP expenditure, following the decision in the assessee's own case and other judicial precedents. 3. Disallowance of Deduction under Section 80G: - The Tribunal addressed the disallowance of the deduction claimed under section 80G, amounting to INR 9,300,000, which was related to CSR activities. It was noted that similar issues had been decided in favor of the assessee in other cases. - The Tribunal held that CSR expenditures, if eligible under section 80G, should be allowed for deduction. The AO was directed to verify the payments and grant the deduction accordingly. 4. Incorrect Levy of Interest: - The issue of incorrect computation of interest under section 234B amounting to INR 473,078,485 was raised. However, specific details or adjudication on this issue were not provided in the summarized judgment. 5. Penalty Proceedings: - The initiation of penalty proceedings under sections 274 read with 270A and 271AA was challenged. However, specific details or adjudication on this issue were not provided in the summarized judgment. Conclusion: The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed. The Tribunal directed the deletion of the AMP expenditure adjustment and allowed the deduction under section 80G, subject to verification by the AO. The judgment emphasized adherence to judicial precedents and proper verification of claims.
|
