TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the transfer pricing adjustment required reconsideration on the selection or exclusion of comparables, including the treatment of companies with functional differences, related party transactions and availability of segmental data; (ii) Whether reimbursement of travel and conveyance expenses and salary and allowance payments to the foreign group company were liable to disallowance under section 40(a)(i); (iii) Whether delay in deposit of employees' provident fund contribution, though made before the due date for filing the return, warranted disallowance.
Issue (i): Whether the transfer pricing adjustment required reconsideration on the selection or exclusion of comparables, including the treatment of companies with functional differences, related party transactions and availability of segmental data.
Analysis: The comparability exercise under the arm's length method turned on functional similarity, the nature of services rendered, the level of related party transactions, and whether reliable segmental or annual report data was available. Certain comparables required verification because of possible functional dissimilarity, high related party transactions, or the need to follow earlier orders in the assessee's own case. At the same time, some companies were directed to be included in light of prior years' findings that they rendered similar end-to-end engineering and consulting services.
Conclusion: The issue was restored in part for fresh examination in respect of some comparables, while inclusion of M. N. Dastur & Company Private Ltd. was directed; the transfer pricing grounds were thus partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Issue (ii): Whether reimbursement of travel and conveyance expenses and salary and allowance payments to the foreign group company were liable to disallowance under section 40(a)(i).
Analysis: Disallowance under section 40(a)(i) depends on whether the sum paid to a non-resident is chargeable to tax in India and whether tax was deductible at source. Reimbursement of expenses without an income element, and payments asserted to be mere reimbursement of costs, required factual verification before the disallowance could be sustained. The same approach applied to the secondment-related salary reimbursements and the treaty-based contention that the services did not make available technical knowledge, experience or skill.
Conclusion: The disallowance issue was set aside for fresh adjudication by the Assessing Officer/TPO, and the ground was allowed for statistical purposes.
Issue (iii): Whether delay in deposit of employees' provident fund contribution, though made before the due date for filing the return, warranted disallowance.
Analysis: The contribution had been deposited after the due date under the provident fund law but before the due date for filing the return of income. In such circumstances, the Tribunal followed the consistent view that no disallowance is called for when the payment is made within the return-filing timeline.
Conclusion: The disallowance was deleted and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only in part: the provident fund disallowance was deleted, while the transfer pricing and section 40(a)(i) issues were not finally decided on merits and were either restored or allowed for statistical purposes.
Ratio Decidendi: Transfer pricing comparables must be tested on functional similarity, related party exposure and reliable data, while disallowance under section 40(a)(i) cannot stand unless the payment to a non-resident is shown to be chargeable to tax in India; further, provident fund contributions paid before the return-filing due date are not liable to disallowance merely because the statutory labour-law due date was missed.
TaxTMI 
