Tribunal decision: varied depreciation rates, allowed vehicle expenses, remanded prior period expenses, excluded certain comparables.

The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, directing a higher rate of depreciation on ITG Networking Equipments, permitting depreciation on company-owned vehicles used for business purposes, disallowing disallowance of running and maintenance expenses of vehicles for non-business use, remanding the disallowance of prior period expenses for verification, and excluding certain comparables in transfer pricing adjustment. The Tribunal emphasized adherence to legal precedents and principles of comparability in transfer pricing.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Rate of depreciation on ITG Networking Equipments.
2. Disallowance of depreciation on company-owned vehicles.
3. Disallowance of running and maintenance expenses of vehicles.
4. Disallowance of prior period expenses.
5. Transfer pricing adjustment.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Rate of Depreciation on ITG Networking Equipments:

The assessee claimed depreciation at 60% on ITG Networking Equipments under the block of Computers, which the AO restricted to 25%. The Tribunal noted that the AO relied on his order for the AY 2002-03, which had been overturned by the Tribunal, allowing the higher rate of depreciation. The Tribunal, following the precedent, allowed the higher rate of depreciation at 60%.

2. Disallowance of Depreciation on Company-Owned Vehicles:

The assessee claimed depreciation on vehicles used by its employees, which the AO disallowed, citing personal use by employees. The Tribunal found that the vehicles were provided by the company and the expenses incurred were for business purposes. Citing judgments from the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal and the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, the Tribunal held that use of vehicles by employees does not constitute personal use by the company and ordered the deletion of the disallowance.

3. Disallowance of Running and Maintenance Expenses of Vehicles:

The AO disallowed 50% of running and maintenance expenses of vehicles used by employees for non-business purposes. The Tribunal noted that this issue was covered by similar judgments which held that such expenses cannot be disallowed as personal or non-business use. The Tribunal ordered the deletion of the disallowance.

4. Disallowance of Prior Period Expenses:

The assessee claimed deduction for expenses incurred in AY 2006-07 but recorded in AY 2007-08. The DRP did not address this claim. The Tribunal noted that expenses incurred for business purposes should be deductible in the year they relate to, even if recorded later. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the AO to verify the details and allow the deduction if the expenses pertained to AY 2006-07 and were otherwise deductible.

5. Transfer Pricing Adjustment:

The assessee reported several international transactions, with the TPO challenging only the 'Provision of marketing support services'. The TPO used single-year data and included five new comparables to determine the ALP, leading to an adjustment of Rs. 28.55 crore. The Tribunal found that the nature of the assessee's activities did not match the new comparables, which were involved in engineering and consultancy services. The Tribunal directed the exclusion of these five companies from the list of comparables and remanded the matter to the TPO/AO to recompute the ALP, allowing the assessee a reasonable opportunity to be heard.

Conclusion:

The appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal providing detailed directions on each issue, ensuring adherence to legal precedents and principles of comparability in transfer pricing. The order was pronounced in the open court on 18.12.2014.

---