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 on account of advertisement, marketing and sales promotion expenses was sustainable in the absence of an established international transaction; (ii) Whether the notional interest adjustment on delayed receivables from the associated enterprise was sustainable; (iii) Whether deduction under section 10A was rightly denied on the receipts claimed as eligible export turnover of unit II.
Issue (i): Whether the transfer pricing adjustment on account of advertisement, marketing and sales promotion expenses was sustainable in the absence of an established international transaction.
Analysis: The adjustment could be made only if an international transaction existed and its price could be benchmarked. The agreement did not show any arrangement, understanding, or obligation requiring the assessee to incur AMP expenditure on behalf of the associated enterprise. Mere incidental benefit to the foreign entity, or the use of its brand, was insufficient. The bright line approach could not be used to presume the very existence of a transaction, and the transfer pricing machinery could not be applied to an imagined transaction lacking an ascertainable price.
Conclusion: The AMP adjustment was unsustainable and was deleted in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether the notional interest adjustment on delayed receivables from the associated enterprise was sustainable.
Analysis: Once the main international transactions had been benchmarked under TNMM and accepted, the receivables issue could not be separately adjusted on the facts of the case. The Tribunal followed the view that delayed receivables, in the absence of a separate sustainable transfer pricing basis, did not warrant an independent arm's length adjustment in the manner adopted by the lower authorities.
Conclusion: The notional interest adjustment was deleted in favour of the assessee.
Issue (iii): Whether deduction under section 10A was rightly denied on the receipts claimed as eligible export turnover of unit II.
Analysis: The assessee's unit II was engaged in data processing and information technology enabled services, and the record showed the existence of qualified technical manpower and STPI approval for the unit. The earlier factual finding in the assessee's own case on the nature of the business activity, together with the principle of consistency and the supporting material on record, showed that the receipts attributable to unit II were eligible for section 10A relief. The contrary emphasis on distribution functions and the dependent agent characterization was held not to displace the established export-oriented nature of unit II's activity.
Conclusion: Deduction under section 10A was allowed in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded on the substantive transfer pricing and section 10A issues, resulting in deletion of the impugned adjustments and allowance of the statutory deduction claimed by the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: For transfer pricing purposes, an adjustment cannot be made unless the Revenue first establishes the existence of an international transaction with an identifiable price, and where the assessee's export unit is engaged in eligible information technology enabled services, section 10A relief cannot be denied merely on a contrary characterization of the business model.
TaxTMI 
