Tribunal Upholds Assessments for Assessee, Adjusts ALP Rates

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions in favor of the assessee for both assessment years. The Tribunal directed the AO/TPO to recompute the Arm's Length Price adjustment for corporate guarantee fees and interest on loans at rates of 0.5% and 0.6%, respectively. Additionally, the Tribunal affirmed the deletion of the excess claim of depreciation, stating that capital subsidies should not reduce the cost of fixed assets for depreciation purposes. The Tribunal's rulings were consistent with previous decisions in the assessee's favor, ensuring proper application of international transaction benchmarking principles and treatment of capital subsidies.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of addition on account of Arm’s Length Price adjustment.
2. Deletion of addition on account of excess claim of depreciation under Section 32 of the IT Act.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Deletion of Addition on Account of Arm’s Length Price Adjustment:

Facts:
The assessee filed returns declaring an income of Rs. 185,85,27,524/- for AY 2008-09. During scrutiny, the AO referred the case to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) concerning international transactions with its AEs. The TPO proposed an addition of Rs. 17,76,54,391/- for transactions involving Corporate Guarantee and Interest on Loan. The AO made the final assessment at Rs. 206,74,23,681/-.

CIT(A) Findings:
The CIT(A) provided partial relief, determining that a corporate guarantee rate of 0.5% was appropriate, and for a counter guarantee given to ABN Amro Bank for a loan availed by Dabur, UK, a rate of 0.6% should be used as the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP). The CIT(A) noted that corporate guarantees are considered international transactions due to the Finance Act, 2012 amendment. The CIT(A) also highlighted that the TPO's approach was flawed as it compared Indian bank guarantees with foreign corporate guarantees.

Tribunal’s Decision:
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the issue had been similarly adjudicated in the assessee’s favor in earlier years. The Tribunal directed the AO/TPO to recompute the ALP for corporate guarantee fee at 0.5% and 0.6% for different transactions, consistent with the CIT(A)’s findings.

Interest on Loan:
The CIT(A) directed the AO/TPO to delete the addition regarding interest on loans, noting that the interest rate charged by the assessee at 7% was higher than the LIBOR plus 1.5% prevalent during the financial year 2007-08. The Tribunal upheld this, referencing previous decisions where LIBOR was deemed appropriate for benchmarking international loan transactions.

2. Deletion of Addition on Account of Excess Claim of Depreciation:

Facts:
The AO reduced the cost of fixed assets by a capital subsidy of Rs. 1.50 crore received under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme, 2000, consequently reducing depreciation by Rs. 17,94,174/-.

CIT(A) Findings:
The CIT(A) deleted the addition, following the precedent set in the assessee’s case for AY 2007-08, where it was held that the subsidy was a capital receipt and should not reduce the cost of acquisition of fixed assets.

Tribunal’s Decision:
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)’s decision, referencing its earlier order which aligned with the Kolkata Bench of the ITAT in Bhagwati Sponge (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT, where it was held that capital investment subsidies should not reduce the cost of capital assets for depreciation purposes.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the department's appeals for both assessment years, affirming the CIT(A)’s decisions on both the Arm’s Length Price adjustment and the excess claim of depreciation. The Tribunal’s decisions were consistent with earlier rulings in the assessee’s favor, ensuring that the principles of benchmarking international transactions and the treatment of capital subsidies were appropriately applied.

---