9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 1395X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Given the findings of the coordinate bench-as extracted above, the reference to the fixed rate of interest and swap variable, with reference to the LIBOR, as has been done by the authorities below to go beyond LIBOR plus 300 bps, is irrelevant. There is no point in making these efforts to circumvent the conclusions arrived at by the coordinate bench, and justifying the same on the basis of a new set of arguments. We direct the Assessing Officer to delete any arm s length price adjustment beyond the difference, if any, between 4.01% interest charged by the assessee and LIBOR plus 300 bps. If suo motu adjustment by the assessee, i.e. adopting an interest rate of 4.01%, is below this rate, obviously no further ALP adjustment is called for. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n holding the interest rate swap of 8,336% (only the fixed component (8.336%) while ignoring / side-lining the floating interest rate (Libor + 389bps)) as the benchmark for determining the interest rate for transfer pricing purposes? Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred by looking at the concept of arms-length as tool to determine taxable income, instead of real income arising to the appellant from 'realistically available options acceptable to both the parties'? Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in disregarding the arm's length character and economic substance of the international transaction? Whether the comparable relied upon by the Ld. TPO and thereby upheld by the Ld. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s length. This issue is no longer res integra. The issue in the appeal is squarely covered, in favour of the assessee, by a coordinate bench decision dated 7th June 2019 in assessee s own case for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11, wherein the coordinate bench has, inter alia, observed as follows: 10. We have carefully considered the submission and perused the records. We find that the commercial expediency aspect of granting interest-free loans is already against the assessee by a Catena of case laws in this regard. The learned counsel of the assessee submission that, commercial rationality should be considered in distinction from commercial expediency is not at all convincing. It is evident from the submissions of the learned c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 1764 of AIR 1980 SC) Every new discovery nor argumentative novelty cannot undo or compel reconsideration of a binding precedent A decision does not lose its authority merely because it was badly argued, inadequately considered or fallaciously reasoned.... Similarly, in the case of Kesho Ram Co. v. Union of India [1989] 3 SCC 151, it was stated by the Supreme Court thus: The binding effect of a decision of this Court (as indeed any superior court) does not depend upon whether a particular argument was considered or not, provided the point with reference to which the argument is advanced subsequently was actually decided in the earlier decision . We see no reasons to take any other view of the matter than the view so taken by the coord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
