Tribunal rules on distribution vs. assembly segments, unsecured loans, and interest imputation

The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, ruling that the aggregation of the distribution segment with the assembly/manufacturing segment was not permissible. Additionally, the Tribunal sided with the assessee regarding the treatment of outstanding receivables from associated enterprises as unsecured loans and the imputation of interest thereon. The decision was based on the distinct Functions, Assets, and Risks of the segments and previous case law, ultimately leading to a favorable outcome for the assessee.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Aggregation of Distribution Segment with Assembly/Manufacturing Segment.
2. Treatment of Outstanding Receivables from AE as Unsecured Loans and Imputing Interest Thereon.

Summary:

1. Aggregation of Distribution Segment with Assembly/Manufacturing Segment:

The first issue raised by the assessee pertained to the aggregation of the distribution segment with the assembly/manufacturing segment by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO). The assessee argued that the TPO erred in aggregating the results of the distribution segment with the assembly/manufacturing segment, which was inconsistent with the previous year's approach where adjustments were only made in the assembly/manufacturing segment. The TPO's show cause notice did not mention such aggregation, and the TPO considered only the manufacturing segments for adjustments. The assessee highlighted that the Functions, Assets, and Risks (FAR) of the two segments were distinct, with the assembly segment involving significant value addition and tangible assets, while the distribution segment primarily involved storage and distribution without value addition. The Tribunal found the assessee's submissions justified and directed that such aggregation was not permissible in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Treatment of Outstanding Receivables from AE as Unsecured Loans and Imputing Interest Thereon:

The second issue involved the treatment of outstanding receivables from associated enterprises (AE) as unsecured loans and the imputation of interest thereon. The TPO considered the delay in payment from AE as unsecured loans and proposed to charge interest based on LIBOR plus 400 basis points. The Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) reduced the adjustment by netting off payables from receivables. The assessee argued that it did not charge interest from its major third-party customers, depicting an arm's length situation, and cited the Tribunal's decision in its own case for AY 2014-15, where a similar adjustment was deleted. The Tribunal, following the precedent set in the assessee's own case and other judicial pronouncements, allowed the appeal on this ground, noting that the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kusum Healthcare was still binding.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the appeal filed by the assessee was partly allowed, with the Tribunal directing that the aggregation of the distribution segment with the assembly/manufacturing segment was not permissible and allowing the appeal regarding the treatment of outstanding receivables from AE as unsecured loans and imputing interest thereon. The order was pronounced in the open court on 12.07.2023.

---