Tribunal's Ruling: Appeal Allowed for Transfer Pricing Adjustment; Grants +/-5% Range to Assessee

The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes regarding the adjudication of Ground Nos. 10 and 13. The Tribunal directed the AO to grant the benefit of a +/-5% range to the assessee and correct the incorrect computation of Transfer Pricing Adjustment based on the principle of proportionality in benchmarking international transactions with AEs. The decision emphasized consistency with past precedents and judicial discipline.

---

---

Issues Involved:
- Appeal against order of DRP/TPO/AO
- Adjudication of Ground Nos. 10 and 13
- Benefit of +/-5% range
- Incorrect computation of Transfer Pricing Adjustment
- Entity level benchmarking vs. proportionality

Analysis:

1. Appeal against order of DRP/TPO/AO:
The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of DRP/TPO/AO. The case was originally heard and adjudicated, but Ground Nos. 10 and 13 were erroneously dismissed as 'not pressed.' A subsequent application was filed, leading to a direction to list the appeal for hearing on specific grounds.

2. Adjudication of Ground Nos. 10 and 13:
Ground No. 13 sought the benefit of a +/-5% range, with the direction for the AO to apply relevant provisions. The Tribunal directed the AO to give effect to confirmed adjustments and decide the issue accordingly. Ground No. 13 was allowed for statistical purposes. Ground No. 10 related to the incorrect computation of Transfer Pricing Adjustment to the manufacturing activity.

3. Benefit of +/-5% range:
The Tribunal directed the AO to apply relevant provisions and grant the requisite benefit to the assessee within the specified range. This direction was given after hearing both parties on the issue.

4. Incorrect computation of Transfer Pricing Adjustment:
The assessee argued that the manufacturing activity involving international transactions with AEs and Non-AEs was benchmarked at the entity level erroneously. The Tribunal referred to past decisions in the assessee's own case for various assessment years to support the claim of proportionality in benchmarking transactions with AEs.

5. Entity level benchmarking vs. proportionality:
The Tribunal upheld the principle of proportionality in benchmarking international transactions with AEs against entity level benchmarking. Citing previous orders in the assessee's favor for different assessment years, the Tribunal allowed Ground No. 10, emphasizing consistency and judicial discipline.

In conclusion, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes concerning the adjudication of Ground Nos. 10 and 13. The Tribunal's decision was based on the application of relevant provisions, past precedents, and the principle of proportionality in transfer pricing adjustments.

---