2017 (11) TMI 1750

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../Hyd/2016. 2. The common issue involved in all these appeals is that the assessee had entered into an international transaction of offering corporate guarantee to its associate enterprises. The Tribunal in its order for the A.Y 2009-10 and 2010-11 has held 0.50% to be reasonable corporate guarantee fee, while in ITA No. 259/HYD/2016 for the A.Y 2011-12, the Tribunal had held that the transaction of corporate guarantee is not an international transaction as it has become an international transaction only by virtue of the amendment of Sec. 92B of the Finance Act 2012 with retrospective effect from 01-04-2012. To come to this conclusion, the Tribunal followed the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal At Mumbai in the case of Siro C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....brought into an international transaction and therefore it cannot be treated to be retrospectively applicable. 5. Having regard to the rival contentions and material on record, we find that the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Siro Clinpharm Private Ltd (supra) has considered all the above arguments of the Revenue to hold that the corporate guarantee cannot be treated as an international transaction prior to the amended provision of u/s 92B of the IT Act with effect from 01-04-2012 i.e from the A.Y 2013-14 onwards. Further, it is also seen for the A.Ys 2009-10 and 2010-11, the assessee had raised the ground that the corporate guarantee is not covered under the definition of international transaction u/s 92B of the IT Act, as....