ITAT allows transfer pricing appeal, holds unaudited segmental accounts trustworthy without specific defects identified

The ITAT Delhi ruled in favor of the assessee regarding transfer pricing adjustment for administrative and agency services. The assessee had allocated common expenses between two segments and provided the basis for apportionment. The CIT(A) questioned the segmental accounts solely because they were not audited, without identifying specific defects. The ITAT held that unaudited segmental accounts cannot be deemed untrustworthy without pointing to particular errors. The court rejected the CIT(A)'s observation about non-allocation of non-compete fees and goodwill, noting the TPO also failed to allocate these expenses. The ITAT directed the AO to delete the impugned adjustment and allowed the assessee's appeal.

---

---

Issues involved:
The judgment involves issues related to Transfer Pricing adjustments, application of TNMM, rejection of segmental accounts, allocation of expenses, and adherence to principles of natural justice.

Transfer Pricing Adjustments:
The appellant challenged the determination of the ALP of international transactions, arguing that the action was beyond the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer and based on incorrect facts and findings. The CIT(A) upheld the reference made to the transfer pricing officer under section 92CA(3) and the application of TNMM at the enterprise level, rejecting the appellant's TP analysis. The appellant's grounds of appeal emphasized errors in law and facts in the impugned order.

Application of TNMM and Rejection of Segmental Accounts:
The appellant utilized TNMM for various international transactions and provided detailed benchmarking analysis. However, the TPO and CIT(A) raised concerns about the segmentation of accounts, alleging that it was done artificially to show profitability in AE-related services and losses in other business segments. The TPO's analysis highlighted the interlinking of functions performed by the appellant, leading to the rejection of segmental accounts.

Allocation of Expenses and Basis of Apportionment:
During the TP assessment proceedings, the appellant explained the basis of revenue and expenditure allocation between business segments. The authorities questioned the trustworthiness of segmental accounts due to lack of audit, but the appellant had allocated common expenses and provided a basis for apportionment. The Tribunal found no merit in the authorities' stance and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the adjustment.

Adherence to Principles of Natural Justice:
The appellant raised concerns about the impugned order being contrary to law and facts, lacking adequate hearing opportunities, and disregarding principles of natural justice. The Tribunal considered relevant documentary evidence, judicial decisions, and arguments from both sides before reaching its decision.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, directing the deletion of the impugned adjustment. The judgment emphasized the importance of proper analysis in transfer pricing matters, allocation of expenses based on sound principles, and adherence to natural justice in tax assessments.

---