ITAT Mumbai deletes transfer pricing adjustment on royalty payments and service fees following precedent decisions

ITAT Mumbai set aside transfer pricing adjustment on royalty and service fee payments, following its own precedent decisions. The tribunal granted working capital adjustment for software support services and removed Axis Integrated Systems Limited from comparables based on prior rulings. Revenue recognition adjustment for sales and marketing support services was deleted, following Delhi HC precedent that advance receipts cannot be taxed until services are rendered. Interest charges under sections 234A and 234C were also deleted as advance tax was paid within statutory timelines.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Adjustment relating to international transaction pertaining to payment of royalty and service fee.
2. Adjustment relating to international transactions pertaining to provision of software support services.
3. Adjustment relating to international transactions pertaining to provision of sales and marketing support services.
4. Additions on account of unearned revenue from subscription services.
5. Short granting of credit for Taxes Deducted at Source (TDS).
6. Non-granting of credit for advance tax paid.
7. Levying of interest under sections 234B, 234A, and 234C.
8. Initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c).

Detailed Analysis:

1. Adjustment on Payment of Royalty and Service Fee:

The tribunal found that the adjustment made by the Ld. AO and Ld. TPO regarding the payment of service fees was not justified. The tribunal relied on its previous decisions in the assessee's own case for earlier assessment years (AY 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15) where it had deleted similar adjustments. It was noted that the functions, assets, and risk profile of the assessee had not changed over the years. The tribunal emphasized that the substance of the transactions, supported by a statutory auditor's certificate, should prevail over the nomenclature used in the agreements. Consequently, the adjustment was directed to be deleted.

2. Adjustment on Software Support Services:

The tribunal addressed the issue of working capital adjustment for software support services. It referred to its decision for AY 2016-17, where a working capital adjustment was granted under similar circumstances. The tribunal directed the Ld. TPO/AO to verify and provide the working capital adjustment to ensure a level playing field between the assessee and comparable companies.

3. Adjustment on Sales and Marketing Support Services:

The tribunal considered the issue of working capital adjustment and the rejection of a comparable company, Axis Integrated Systems Limited. It referred to its decision for AY 2016-17, where working capital adjustment was granted. Additionally, the tribunal upheld the rejection of Axis Integrated Systems Limited as a comparable, based on its decision for AY 2014-15, due to functional dissimilarities. The tribunal directed the AO to make computations accordingly.

4. Additions on Unearned Revenue:

The tribunal found that the addition made by the Ld. AO/DRP on account of unearned revenue from subscription services was not sustainable. It relied on its previous rulings for AY 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2016-17, where it had upheld the assessee's revenue recognition policy. The tribunal emphasized that the consistent system of revenue recognition followed by the assessee was in accordance with Accounting Standard-9 and other relevant guidelines. It noted that the revenue recognition method should not be disturbed unless there was a change in facts or circumstances.

5. Short Granting of TDS Credit:

The tribunal directed the AO to address the issue of short granting of TDS credit based on evidence provided by the assessee. The assessee had filed an application under section 154, which was pending disposal.

6. Non-Granting of Advance Tax Credit:

Similar to the TDS credit issue, the tribunal directed the AO to address the non-granting of advance tax credit based on evidence provided by the assessee.

7. Levying of Interest under Sections 234B, 234A, and 234C:

The tribunal found that the levying of interest under sections 234B, 234A, and 234C was consequential. It directed the AO to recompute the tax payable or refund due without the said interest, based on the facts presented by the assessee.

8. Initiation of Penalty Proceedings:

The tribunal considered the initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) as premature and consequential, requiring no finding at this stage.

Conclusion:

The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes, with directions to the AO to address specific issues based on the tribunal's findings and previous rulings in the assessee's own case.

---