2020 (3) TMI 1235

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Dispute Resolution Panel-1 (DRP), Mumbai, pertaining to the assessment year 2010-11. 2. The dispute in the present appeal hovers around the addition made of Rs. 3,23,85,404, on account of transfer pricing adjustment to the arm's length price of the services provided to the Associated Enterprises (AE). 3. Brief facts are, the assessee, a resident company, is a subsidiary of Khazanah National Berhad (KNB), Malaysia. As stated by the Transfer Pricing Officer, KNB is an investment holding arm of the Government of Malaysia and the assessee provides non-binding investment advisory services to KNB. During the year under consideration, the assessee earned revenue of Rs. 19.09 crore for provision of investment advisory services to the AE. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....omparables to the operating cost, the Transfer Pricing Officer determined the arm's length price of the transaction with the AE at Rs. 22,14,08,143, as against the price charged by the assessee of Rs. 19,09,00,657. The resultant shortfall of Rs. 3,05,07,486, was added as transfer pricing adjustment to the arm's length price. On the basis of transfer pricing adjustment proposed by the Transfer Pricing Officer, the Assessing Officer framed the draft assessment order. While considering assessee's objections against the draft assessment order, learned DRP upheld the decision of the Transfer Pricing Officer. 5. The learned Authorised Representative submitted, the assessee is disputing only two comparables viz. Motilal Oswal Investment Advisor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../ Mum./2014, dated 25.10.2017; and viii) AGM India Advisors Pvt. Ltd. v/s DCIT, ITA no.4801/ Mum./2015, dated 18.05.2016. 8. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the observations of the Transfer Pricing Officer. 9. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. From the material placed on record it is very much clear that this company is engaged in the business of investment banking, merchant banking, merger and acquisition, private equity, syndication, etc. Whereas, the assessee has only one segment of providing non-binding investment advisory services to the AE. Looking at the functional profile of this company, not only different benches of the Tribunal, but even different High ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cannot be treated as comparable. Further, he submitted, accepting the aforesaid factual position the Transfer Pricing Officer himself has rejected this company as a comparable in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2012-13. Thus, he submitted, the company should be excluded as a comparable. In support, he relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in AGM India Advisors Pvt. Ltd. vs/ DCIT, ITA no.4757/Mum./2015, dated 18th May 2016. 11. The learned Departmental Representative strongly relied upon the observations of learned DRP and Transfer Pricing Officer. 12. We have considered rival submissions and perused the material on record. On a perusal of the materials available on record it is noticed that this company has multiple seg....