Tribunal adjusts transfer pricing, disallows disallowances, upholds depreciation claim, and dismisses revenue's appeal.

The assessee's appeals were partly allowed, with the Tribunal making adjustments to the transfer pricing adjustments on cost contribution charges and field supervision services. Disallowances under various sections were dismissed, and adjustments related to unutilized CENVAT credit and AIR information were either deleted or partially allowed. The Tribunal upheld the assessee's claim for depreciation on Uninterrupted Power Supply at 60% rather than the Assessing Officer's 15%. The revenue's appeal for the Assessment Year 2009-10 was dismissed, maintaining consistency with previous decisions and judicial precedents.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Transfer pricing adjustment on cost contribution charges.
2. Transfer pricing adjustment on payment towards field supervision services.
3. Disallowance of cost contribution charges under sections 37(1), 40A(2)(b), and 40A(i).
4. Adjustment of unutilized CENVAT credit to closing stock under Section 145A.
5. Additions based on Annual Information Return (AIR).
6. Depreciation rate on Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS).

Detailed Analysis:

1. Transfer Pricing Adjustment on Cost Contribution Charges:
The assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 4,44,07,733/- made by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) on cost contribution charges paid to the overseas Associated Enterprises (AEs). The TPO determined the arm's length price (ALP) of the transaction as "Nil," leading to the adjustment. The Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) allowed 50% of the amount, determining the ALP at Rs. 2,22,03,867/-. The assessee applied for Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP), resolving the dispute by determining the ALP at Rs. 3,33,05,800/-, proposing an adjustment of Rs. 1,11,01,933/-. Consequently, the assessee withdrew grounds No. 1 to 4, and these were dismissed as not pressed.

2. Transfer Pricing Adjustment on Payment Towards Field Supervision Services:
The assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 3,47,360/- made by the TPO on payments for field supervision services. The TPO disallowed the 15% discount provided by the assessee, determining it was not at arm's length. The DRP upheld this adjustment. The assessee invoked MAP for transactions with the USA AE, resulting in a proposed adjustment of Rs. 1,41,995/-. For the remaining amount of Rs. 2,05,365/-, the Tribunal followed its decision from AY 2006-07, accepting the discount as arm's length and deleted the addition not covered under MAP.

3. Disallowance of Cost Contribution Charges under Sections 37(1), 40A(2)(b), and 40A(i):
The assessee challenged the disallowance of cost contribution charges under sections 37(1), 40A(2)(b), and 40A(i). The final assessment order did not make such disallowances, and the MAP proceedings allowed deduction of Rs. 3,33,05,800/-. Thus, the ground became redundant and was dismissed.

4. Adjustment of Unutilized CENVAT Credit to Closing Stock under Section 145A:
The assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 22,36,615/- for adjustment of unutilized CENVAT credit to closing stock under Section 145A. The Tribunal followed its decision from previous assessment years (AY 2007-08 and AY 2006-07) and restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for re-computation in accordance with earlier years' directions.

5. Additions Based on Annual Information Return (AIR):
The assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 42,383/- based on AIR information. The Assessing Officer added this amount due to unreconciled differences between the income as per books and AIR. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer did not make proper inquiries to verify the assessee's claims and deleted the addition except for Rs. 449/- related to Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., which the assessee could not reconcile.

6. Depreciation Rate on Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS):
The assessee claimed depreciation at 60% on UPS, treating it as part of the computer system. The Assessing Officer restricted it to 15%, treating it as plant and machinery. The Tribunal, following judicial precedents, allowed the depreciation at 60%, considering UPS as part of the computer system.

Separate Judgments for Different Assessment Years:

Assessment Year 2008-09 (ITA no. 7723/Mum./2012):
- Grounds No. 1 to 4 dismissed as not pressed.
- Part deletion of addition on field supervision services.
- Redundant disallowance under sections 37(1), 40A(2)(b), and 40A(i) dismissed.
- Adjustment of unutilized CENVAT credit restored to Assessing Officer.
- Partial deletion of addition based on AIR.
- Depreciation on UPS allowed at 60%.
- Appeal partly allowed.

Assessment Year 2009-10 (ITA no. 1127/Mum./2014):
- Grounds No. 1 to 4 dismissed as not pressed.
- Part deletion of addition on field supervision services.
- Redundant disallowance under sections 37(1), 40A(2)(b), and 40A(i) dismissed.
- Adjustment of unutilized CENVAT credit restored to Assessing Officer.
- Addition based on AIR deleted.
- Depreciation on UPS allowed at 60%.
- Appeal partly allowed.

Revenue’s Appeal for AY 2009-10 (ITA no. 1068/Mum./2014):
- Grounds related to cost contribution charges and unutilized CENVAT credit dismissed.
- Appeal dismissed.

Conclusion:
The assessee’s appeals were partly allowed, and the revenue’s appeal was dismissed. The Tribunal provided detailed analysis and directions on each issue, ensuring consistency with previous decisions and judicial precedents.

---