ALP adjustments deleted for excess credit and guarantees; mixed rulings on expenses; issues remanded under sections 80IB and 10B

The ITAT Ahmedabad allowed the assessee's appeal by deleting the ALP adjustment related to excess credit period granted to its US AE, holding no comparable real transactions existed and the adjustment lacked commercial reality. It also ruled that corporate guarantees issued as shareholder activities, without impact on profits or assets, do not constitute international transactions under section 92B, thus deleting related ALP adjustments. The tribunal remanded the issue of deductions under sections 80IB and 10B for fresh adjudication per earlier orders. Regarding expenses, it confirmed disallowance of electricity expenses but deleted disallowance of telephone expenses of the MD. However, the tribunal upheld the disallowance of software expenses related to ERP implementation, finding no error in the authorities' decision.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Arm's Length Price (ALP) Adjustment for Excess Credit Period.
2. ALP Adjustment for Corporate Guarantees.
3. Adjustments for Inter-Division Transfers and Deductions under Sections 80IB and 10B.
4. Calculation of Total Turnover for Section 10B Deduction.
5. Exclusion of Specific Income Items from Section 80IB Deduction.
6. Disallowance of Telephone and Electricity Expenses.
7. Treatment of Software Expenses as Capital Expenditure.

Detailed Analysis:

1. ALP Adjustment for Excess Credit Period:

The assessee challenged the ALP adjustment of Rs. 2,10,95,246 for the excess credit period allowed to its US-based associated enterprise, Micro Inks USA. The Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) noted that the assessee allowed an average credit period of 186 days to Micro Inks USA compared to 130 days for independent enterprises. The TPO proposed an ALP adjustment based on the time value of money at 6.38% on a LIBOR plus basis. The assessee argued that the extended credit period was due to the nature of the semi-finished goods sold to Micro Inks USA, which required further processing. The Tribunal found that the issue was covered in favor of the assessee by a previous decision, stating that the credit period for finished goods could not be compared with that for semi-finished goods. The Tribunal upheld the grievance of the assessee and directed the deletion of the impugned ALP adjustment.

2. ALP Adjustment for Corporate Guarantees:

The assessee was aggrieved by an ALP adjustment of Rs. 2,23,62,603 for corporate guarantees issued on behalf of its associated enterprises. The TPO computed the arm's length price for these guarantees at 2%, considering it a prevalent market rate. The assessee argued that these guarantees did not involve any cost and were in the nature of quasi-capital. The Tribunal referred to various decisions, including Bharti Airtel Limited Vs ACIT, which held that such guarantees did not constitute an 'international transaction' under Section 92B. The Tribunal noted that the issuance of corporate guarantees was in the nature of shareholder activities and did not have a bearing on the profits, income, losses, or assets of the enterprise. The Tribunal directed the deletion of the impugned ALP adjustment, emphasizing the need for clear legislative guidance on the transfer pricing implications of corporate guarantees.

3. Adjustments for Inter-Division Transfers and Deductions under Sections 80IB and 10B:

The assessee's grievance regarding adjustments for inter-division transfers affecting deductions under Sections 80IB and 10B was remitted to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal directed the AO to follow the directions set out in the orders for the assessment years 2002-03 and 2005-06.

4. Calculation of Total Turnover for Section 10B Deduction:

The issue of including excise duty, sales tax, insurance, and freight in the total turnover for Section 10B deduction was remitted to the AO for fresh adjudication on merits by a speaking order, in accordance with the law.

5. Exclusion of Specific Income Items from Section 80IB Deduction:

The Tribunal directed the inclusion of income from the sale of scrap in the computation of deduction under Section 80IB, following the order for the assessment year 2005-06. Other items, such as discount on purchase of DEPB, gain on sale of DFRC, insurance claim, and income from DEPB/DFRC, were remitted to the AO for fresh adjudication in line with earlier years' orders.

6. Disallowance of Telephone and Electricity Expenses:

The Tribunal confirmed the disallowance of electricity expenses of Rs. 8,83,622 but deleted the disallowance of telephone expenses of Rs. 1,03,272, following the order for the assessment year 2005-06.

7. Treatment of Software Expenses as Capital Expenditure:

The Tribunal upheld the treatment of software expenses as capital expenditure, noting that the expenses were incurred on implementing new ERP software and not for maintenance or support of existing software. The Tribunal approved the stand of the authorities below and declined to interfere in the matter.

Conclusion:

The appeal was partly allowed, with specific issues remitted to the AO for fresh adjudication, and certain disallowances and adjustments were upheld or deleted based on the Tribunal's detailed analysis and previous decisions.

---