Royalty to holding company for trademark use, corporate guarantee pricing, and wind power banking set-offs upheld on appeal

Disallowance of royalty under s. 40A(2)(a) for payment to the holding company for use of a trademark was rejected because, following binding co-ordinate bench precedent on identical facts, the assessee was entitled to deduction for royalty for use of the brand; the deletion of the addition by the CIT(A) was upheld and the Revenue's grounds were dismissed. Transfer pricing adjustment on corporate guarantee was rejected as the CIT(A), applying tribunal jurisprudence, correctly directed benchmarking at 1% and recomputation of ALP; the CIT(A)'s order was affirmed and the Revenue's grounds were dismissed for both AYs. Downward adjustment under s. 80-IA(8) relating to wheeled/banked wind power adjusted against captive consumption was rejected by applying precedent on identical facts; the CIT(A)'s relief was upheld and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the addition by the Assessing Officer disallowing royalty payments under section 40A(2) is sustainable; (ii) Whether the Assessing Officer/TPO correctly determined ALP for corporate guarantee fees or whether the CIT(A)s adoption of 1% is correct; (iii) Whether the deduction under section 80IA(8) should be computed using the market value adopted by the assessee or the rate fixed by the State Electricity Board.

Issue (i): Whether the addition on account of royalty payment should be disallowed under section 40A(2).

Analysis: The facts include an assignment deed transferring the trade mark to a related proprietor and a user agreement fixing royalty at 0.5% of turnover. Previous Tribunal decisions in the assessee's own case and applicable precedents on turnover-based user agreements and revenue nature of royalty were considered. The applicability of section 40A(2) was examined in light of the identity of recipient and the commercial substance of the assignment and user agreement.

Conclusion: In favour of Assessee the addition is dismissed and the royalty is held to be allowable as revenue expenditure.

Issue (ii): Whether the corporate guarantee fee should be benchmarked at the rate adopted by the CIT(A) (1%) instead of the TPO/AOs rate.

Analysis: The available internal comparable (bank guarantee commission at 0.75%1%) and authorities on the inapplicability of unadjusted bank guarantee rates as automatic comparables were considered, including Rule 10B principles and relevant Tribunal guidance. The CIT(A) admitted and relied on the internal comparable and directed adoption of 1% as ALP.

Conclusion: In favour of Assessee the CIT(A)s adoption of 1% for corporate guarantee fee is upheld and the addition is dismissed.

Issue (iii): Whether the market value for computing deduction under section 80IA(8) is the rate adopted by the assessee or the rate charged by the State Electricity Board to industrial consumers.

Analysis: The authorities on market value under section 80IA(8), including the Supreme Courts ratio in Jindal Steel & Power, and Tribunal decisions applying that ratio were examined. The factual position that the assessee used captive generation for its industrial units and comparisons of adopted rates were considered.

Conclusion: In favour of Assessee the CIT(A)s approach consistent with the Jindal Steel ratio is upheld and the addition is dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The appellate authoritys deletions and adjustments in respect of royalty payments, corporate guarantee fee ALP, and market value for section 80IA(8) claims are upheld; all grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are dismissed across the three assessment years.

Ratio Decidendi: Royalty fixed by a valid assignment and user agreement based on turnover is revenue in nature and deductible; where internal comparable data meeting Rule 10B criteria exists it may be adopted to determine ALP for corporate guarantees; for section 80IA(8) purposes the market value of electricity is to be determined by reference to the price in the open market as represented by the rate at which the State Electricity Board supplies power to industrial consumers.

---