2020 (10) TMI 1150 - HC - Income Tax

High Court Upholds Transfer Pricing Decision, Modifies Risk Adjustments

The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision on transfer pricing adjustments, finding that the functional similarity of comparables had been adequately ... TP Adjustment - comparable selection - excluding Celestial Labs Ltd., Infosys Technologies Ltd, KALS Information Systems Ltd., Tata Elxsi Ltd. Wipro Ltd and Lucid Software Ltd. - HELD THAT:- Issue with regard to functional similarity of the assessee has been examined in detail by the Tribunal. Therefore, we hold that the first substantial question of law framed by a bench of this court in fact, does not arise for consideration in the instant case. Transfer Pricing analysis and the risk adjustment - In second substantial question of law Tribunal has remitted the issue with regard to market risk adjustment to the Assessing Officer in the light of the decision, which have been cited in the order of the Tribunal. We deem it appropriate to modify the aforesaid directions contained in the order of the Tribunal and direct the Assessing Officer to determine the issue with regard to market risk adjustment afresh in accordance with law. Accordingly, the second substantial question of law is answered. Deduction u/s 10B - reimbursement of traveling and technical services charges incurred in foreign currency - The third and fourth substantial questions of law are against the revenue and are covered by the by decision of the Supreme Court in HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD [2018 (5) TMI 357 - SUPREME COURT] Issues:1. Transfer Pricing adjustments based on functional similarity of comparables.2. Risk adjustment in Transfer Pricing analysis.3. Exclusion of certain expenses from total turnover for deduction computation under Section 10B.4. Correct computation of deduction under Section 10B based on judicial precedents.Issue 1: Transfer Pricing AdjustmentsThe appeal involved the question of whether the Tribunal was correct in excluding certain companies as comparables without considering the functional similarity with the assessee. The Tribunal had relied on previous orders without delving into the merits of each case. The High Court observed that the Tribunal had indeed examined the functional similarity of the assessee in detail. Consequently, the first substantial question of law did not arise for consideration in the case.Issue 2: Risk Adjustment in Transfer Pricing AnalysisThe Tribunal had remitted the issue of market risk adjustment to the Assessing Officer based on cited decisions. The High Court modified the directions, directing the Assessing Officer to determine the market risk adjustment issue afresh in accordance with the law. Thus, the second substantial question of law was answered in this context.Issue 3: Exclusion of Expenses for Deduction ComputationRegarding the exclusion of certain expenses from total turnover for deduction under Section 10B, the Tribunal had held in favor of the assessee. The High Court noted that the third and fourth substantial questions of law were against the revenue and were covered by the Supreme Court decision in 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III VS. HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD.' 404 ITR 719. Therefore, the High Court disposed of the appeal based on the analysis provided.This judgment dealt with intricate Transfer Pricing issues, including functional similarity assessments, risk adjustments, and computation of deductions under Section 10B. The High Court's detailed analysis and alignment with relevant judicial precedents ensured a comprehensive resolution of the appeal.