Notional interest on delayed AE trade receivables: s.92B "international transaction" test and flawed CUP basis, adjustment deleted.

Adjustment for notional interest on outstanding receivables from associated enterprises was held unsustainable because a continuing debit balance, by itself, is not an "international transaction" under s.92B unless it is shown to have a bearing on the assessee's profits, income, losses, or assets; no such impact was demonstrated. Further, delayed realization must be examined in light of the agreed commercial payment terms, not in isolation. Even if treated as an international transaction, the TPO's CUP analysis was legally flawed: LIBOR applies to lending/borrowing, not trade overdues, and comparables must be receivables (debtors), not loans. Absent internal/external CUP evidence of interest on similar overdues, the ALP adjustment was deleted and the appeal allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether an arm's length price adjustment can be sustained in respect of interest not charged by the assessee on continuing debit balances (overdues beyond thirty days) of associated enterprises for the assessment year 2004-05.

Analysis: Section 92 requires income from an international transaction to be computed with regard to arm's length price; section 92B defines 'international transaction' to include lending or borrowing of money and other transactions affecting profits, incomes, losses or assets. A continuing debit balance is, in substance, the result of an underlying commercial transaction and not a standalone lending/borrowing transaction; payment timing and credit terms form part of the commercial transaction and must be examined in that context. The residuary limb of section 92B applies only where a transaction demonstrably affects profits, incomes, losses or assets; absent evidence that non-realisation of debts impacted these, a continuing debit balance alone does not qualify as an international transaction. Where a CUP method is applied to alleged excessive credit period, comparables must relate to dues recoverable from debtors (internal or external CUP) and not to lending-borrowing rates. Applying LIBOR is appropriate for lending/borrowing but not for commercial overdues unless the transaction is a loan; no internal or external CUP comparability was undertaken here to justify a notional interest adjustment.

Conclusion: The arm's length adjustment of Rs. 12,51,175 made by the Transfer Pricing Officer is unsustainable and is to be deleted; decision is in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: A continuing debit balance arising from a commercial transaction does not, without more, constitute an 'international transaction' under section 92B; ALP adjustments for non-charging of interest on overdues require comparability under the CUP method and cannot be based on lending rates (e.g., LIBOR) unless the underlying transaction is a lending/borrowing transaction.

---