Letter of comfort to associated enterprises not international transaction under section 92B, creates no financial liability

ITAT Mumbai ruled on multiple transfer pricing and tax issues. The tribunal held that provision of letter of comfort/support to associated enterprises is not an international transaction under section 92B as it creates no financial liability, unlike corporate guarantee. The court deleted the transfer pricing adjustment. On section 14A disallowance, ITAT found the AO failed to record proper satisfaction before making additions, thus deleting the disallowance. Education cess paid on income tax was allowed as deduction following Bombay HC precedent in Sesa Goa Ltd. Corporate guarantee commission at 0.20% was upheld as arm's length. Additional depreciation claim for subsequent year was allowed when assets were used less than 180 days initially. TDS disallowance under section 194H for trip scheme expenses was deleted as amounts were paid to travel company with proper TDS deduction.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Addition on account of transfer pricing adjustment.
2. Disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act.
3. Taxability of royalty income received from a subsidiary in Egypt.
4. Deduction of education cess paid on income-tax.
5. Applicability of beneficial rate as per DTAA to the dividend distribution tax (DDT).
6. Adjustment of corporate guarantee commission.
7. Disallowance on account of letter of comfort.
8. Claim of deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act.
9. Disallowance of expenditure incurred on television advertisement.
10. Claim of additional depreciation.
11. Disallowance of expenditure incurred on trip scheme.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Addition on account of transfer pricing adjustment:
The assessee challenged an addition of Rs. 3,28,00,000/- related to transfer pricing adjustment for providing non-contractual letters of comfort/support to banks on behalf of its subsidiaries without charging any fee. The TPO determined an arm's length fee of 1.41% of the loan availed by the AEs, proposing an adjustment of Rs. 1,51,71,220. The Commissioner (Appeals) equated the letter of comfort to a corporate guarantee and determined the arm's length price at 20% of 0.20%. The Tribunal found no financial implication on the assessee from the letter of comfort/support and concluded that it does not constitute an international transaction under section 92B of the Income Tax Act. Hence, the addition was deleted.

2. Disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act:
The assessee contested the disallowance of Rs. 102.26 lakhs under section 14A r.w.r. 8D. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer did not record proper satisfaction before rejecting the assessee's computation of disallowance. The Tribunal referred to its earlier decision and the jurisdictional High Court's judgment, which upheld the deletion of similar disallowance. Consequently, the disallowance was deleted.

3. Taxability of royalty income received from a subsidiary in Egypt:
The assessee claimed that royalty income of Rs. 5.46 crores received from its Egyptian subsidiary is not taxable in India under Article 13 of the India-Egypt DTAA. The Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, considering the provisions of the DTAA and the Tribunal's decisions in earlier years.

4. Deduction of education cess paid on income-tax:
The assessee claimed deduction of education cess as an allowable expenditure. The Tribunal relied on the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Sesa Goa Ltd. and other similar rulings, which held that education cess is not in the nature of a rate or tax under section 40(a)(ii). Hence, the deduction was allowed.

5. Applicability of beneficial rate as per DTAA to the dividend distribution tax (DDT):
The Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer to examine the applicability of the beneficial rate under the applicable DTAA to the DDT paid under section 115-O of the Act.

6. Adjustment of corporate guarantee commission:
The revenue challenged the decision to restrict the adjustment of corporate guarantee commission to 0.2% p.a. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, noting that in earlier years, the Tribunal and the jurisdictional High Court had accepted the commission at 0.20% as arm's length.

7. Disallowance on account of letter of comfort:
The Tribunal, in line with its decision on the assessee's appeal, held that the provision of letter of comfort does not constitute an international transaction under section 92B. Hence, the adjustment was deleted.

8. Claim of deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act:
The revenue contested the deduction under section 35(2AB) based on the DSIR certificate. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s direction to verify the nature of the expenditure and allow the deduction if it was for R&D purposes, irrespective of DSIR approval.

9. Disallowance of expenditure incurred on television advertisement:
The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision to delete the disallowance of expenditure on TV advertisement, noting that similar disallowances in earlier years were deleted by the Tribunal and upheld by the jurisdictional High Court.

10. Claim of additional depreciation:
The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision to allow the carried-over additional depreciation from the preceding year, following judicial precedents and noting that the revenue did not appeal against a similar decision in the earlier year.

11. Disallowance of expenditure incurred on trip scheme:
The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision to delete the disallowance of expenditure on the trip scheme, noting that the scheme was for business purposes, the amount was paid to SOTC and subjected to TDS, and there was no principal-agent relationship requiring TDS under section 194H.

Conclusion:
The assessee's appeal was partly allowed, and the revenue's appeal was dismissed.

---