2021 (10) TMI 751

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'ITAT') in ITA No.7348/DEL/2018 for Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. The appellant in the present appeal has sought framing of the following questions of law:- 1. Whether the order of ITAT was perverse on fact s directing to exclude Aditya Birla Capital Advisors Pvt. Ltd. as this company performs similar functions as that of the assessee? 2. Whether the order of ITAT was perverse on fact directing to delete adjustments made on account of interest on receivables? 3. Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the ITAT erred in excluding Aditya Birla Capital Advisors Pvt. Ltd, (for short 'ABCL') as a comparable since it is engag....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... No. 461/2017, ITA 526/2017, ITA 590/2017 and ITA 82/2018. 7. As regards the second proposed question of law, without prejudice to the argument that outstanding receivables are not an "international transaction", learned senior counsel for respondent submits that there were no outstanding receivables itself in the present case. 8. He points out that during the Transfer Pricing Proceedings, the respondent had filed a chart containing details of money received corresponding to invoices raised on AEs. 9. He contends that the Transfer Pricing Officer while making the adjustment on account of the delay in receiving the outstanding has only considered invoices/receivables paid beyond sixty days for making a notional interest adjustment i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....layed invoices while at the same time ignoring invoices/payment received in advance. Consequently, factually there can be no notional computation of 'delayed receivables' only ignoring the receivables received in advance. 13. A perusal of paper book reveals that most of the invoices/receivables had been paid significantly in advance. When the period for which the amounts of receivables received in advanced enjoyed by the respondent is seen vis-a-vis the amount receivable beyond sixty days, it is apparent that the respondent has received significantly more advance rather than outstanding receivable beyond sixty days. 14. Consequently, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the notional interest relating to alleged delayed payments....