Tribunal rules in favor of assessee in income tax appeal on international management services value determination

CEVA Logistics India P. Ltd. Versus DCIT Circle-1 (1) Gurgaon

CEVA Logistics India P. Ltd. Versus DCIT Circle-1 (1) Gurgaon - TMI Issues:
1. Validity of assessment order passed in the name of a nonexistent entity.
2. Determination of value of international transaction for management services availed from associated enterprises at Nil.

Issue 1:
The appeal challenged the final assessment order passed under section 143 (3) r.w.s. 144 C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 concerning the assessment year 2014-15, questioning the validity of the assessment order being passed in the name of a nonexistent entity. However, during the hearing, the counsel did not press this ground and submitted to argue the issue on merits. Consequently, ground No. 1 was dismissed as not pressed.

Issue 2:
The assessee contested the decision of the departmental authorities in determining the value of the international transaction for management services availed from associated enterprises at Nil. The assessee, a logistic service provider, engaged in international transactions with overseas Associated Enterprises (AE), including management services. The Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) questioned the benefit received from these services and determined the arm's length price at Nil, leading to an adjustment of Rs. 15,05,26,398 to the assessee's income. The Dispute Resolution Panel upheld the TPO's decision, prompting the appeal. The counsel argued that the TPO cannot apply the benefit test while determining the arm's length price of intra-group services, citing relevant precedents. The Departmental Representative contended that the assessee failed to demonstrate the actual receipt of services and benefits, justifying the adjustment.

Upon review, it was noted that the assessee had made payments for management services over multiple assessment years, and similar transactions were referred to in previous years. The Tribunal held that the TPO's adjustment to Nil was unsustainable, emphasizing that the department cannot apply the benefit test to determine the value of a transaction at Nil. Citing judicial principles and precedents, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition. Consequential and premature grounds were not adjudicated, resulting in the partial allowance of the assessee's appeal.