Tribunal allows appeal on ALP for software services, directs fresh comparability examination.

The Tribunal partially allowed the assessee's appeal regarding the determination of the Arms Length Price (ALP) for software development services provided to its Associated Enterprises (AE). The Tribunal directed a fresh examination of comparability and endorsed the treatment of bad and doubtful debts as operating expenses. The appeal was partially allowed based on these grounds, with other issues not pursued for adjudication.

---

---

Issues:
- Correctness of determination of Arms Length Price (ALP) of international transaction for rendering software development services by the assessee to its Associated Enterprises (AE) under section 92 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
1. The appeal by the assessee was against the final order passed by the DCIT regarding the determination of ALP for software development services provided to its AE. The key issue was whether the ALP was correctly determined under section 92 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2013-14.

2. The assessee received a sum for the SWD services provided to its AE, and the operating profit to operating cost ratio was calculated at 13%. The assessee selected 5 comparable companies for its Transfer Pricing (TP) study, with an average profit margin of 12.52%. The Transaction Net Margin Method (TNMM) was chosen for ALP determination. The TPO accepted 1 comparable company chosen by the assessee and selected 6 others, resulting in adjustments to the ALP.

3. Following objections by the assessee, the DRP rejected 3 comparable companies chosen by the assessee, leading to a revised computation of ALP. The revised adjustment was incorporated in the final assessment order by the AO, prompting the assessee's appeal before the Tribunal.

4. During the Tribunal proceedings, the assessee requested the exclusion of one comparable company and challenged the treatment of bad and doubtful debts in operating expenditure by the TPO. The company in question, L & T Infotech Ltd., was deemed functionally different from the assessee. The Tribunal referred to previous decisions and remanded the issue back to the AO/TPO for fresh examination.

5. The Tribunal also addressed the treatment of bad and doubtful debts as operating expenses in the PLI OP/OC of comparable companies, citing a High Court decision. The provision for bad and doubtful debts was deemed an operating expense for comparison purposes.

6. The Tribunal partially allowed the assessee's appeal, directing a fresh examination of comparability and endorsing the treatment of bad and doubtful debts as operating expenses. Other grounds were not pursued for adjudication, resulting in the partial allowance of the appeal.

---