TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 308
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. The ground nos. 1 to 1.3 raised by the assessee are challenging the confirmation of disallowance of contribution made by the assessee to Employees Group Gratuity Scheme. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. M/s. GKN Driveline (India) Ltd. (GKN India or the assessee) was incorporated on July 25, 1985 as a private limited company and was converted into a public limited company on August 1, 1986. GKN India is a part of the driveshaft division of GKN Group's automotive business segment. The Company is engaged in manufacturing and marketing Constant Velocity Joints (CVJs) which form an essential part of the front wheel drive of motor vehicles. GKN India sells to manufactures of passenger cars ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for the similar contribution made to LIC Gratuity Fund in A.Y. 2018-19. Based on these submissions of the assessee, the learned DRP directed the learned AO to verify these facts from the records and also ensured whether all the conditions prescribed under Section 36(1)(v) of the Act was specified by the AO. 4. The learned AO in the giving effect proceedings to learned DRP directions observed that the copy of the letter of approval of the CIT dated 16.12.2003 was seen by him and made an observation that from the same, it was not clear whether the said Employees Group Gratuity Scheme is also applicable to the employees of GKN driveline (India) Pvt. Ltd. Accordingly, he proceeded to make the disallowance under section 36(1)(v) of the Act. 5.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the sum of Rs. 2,43,237/-. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Considering the various international transactions carried out by the assessee with its associated enterprises (AEs), the learned AO had made a reference to the learned Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) under Section 92CA(1) of the Act for determining the Arm's Length Price of the international transactions. Accordingly, an order stood passed by the learned TPO under section 92CA(3) of the Act on 11.01.2021. In the said order, the import of transactions from AE and export of transactions to AEs were accepted by the learned TPO to be at Arm's Length Price (ALP). The learned TPO called for details of outstanding receivables from AEs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ding receivables from the AEs. The learned AR filed a chart showing AEs receivables and payables as on 31.03.2017. He also pleaded that by taking comprehensive values of amounts payable to AEs and amounts receivables from AEs, the amounts payable to AEs are much more than the amounts receivable from AEs. Hence, on net basis, there is no outstanding interest receivable. Accordingly, there is no need to impute any interest thereon. The learned AR also placed reliance on the Co-ordinate Bench decision of this Tribunal in the case of Motherson Sumi Infotech and Designs Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No.6331/Del/2016 for A.Y. 2012-13 dated 26.02.2018. The relevant operative portion of the said order is reproduced hereunder: "5. We have considered the ri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of M/s. Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., (supra), squarely apply in the case of the assessee, since the assessee earned significantly higher margin than the comparable companies, which have been accepted by the TPO, therefore, there was no justification to charge interest on outstandings. The decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., (supra), squarely apply to the facts and circumstances of the case. The assessee also explained that there are similar delays in collection of outstanding receivables from both A.Es and non-A.Es which is due to business and commercial reasons. Therefore, there is uniformity in act of assessee in not charging inte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the instant case before us. Further, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Bechtel India Pvt. Ltd. vs. JCIT in ITA No. 1478/Del/2015 for A.Y. 2010-11 dated 21.12.2015, it was pleaded that assessee is a debt free company and hence, there is no question of charging interest on outstanding receivables from AEs. But on perusal of the orders of the lower authorities, we find that no such finding is given in the orders to this effect. No submission was even made by the assessee before the lower authorities to this effect. Hence, we refrain to consider this argument in this order. However, considering the arguments advanced by the learned AR before us which stood uncontroverted by the Revenue before us, and in view of the aforesaid....