Transfer pricing adjustments upheld under s.143(3), s.144C(13) and s.92CA(1); Project Office deemed executing arm; s.9/Art.7 attribution affirmed

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ITAT upholds the assessment under s.143(3) read with s.144C(13), finding the reference under s.92CA(1) valid and the TPO acted within jurisdiction; the assessment order is not void and Grounds 1-3 are dismissed. The Project Office is characterized as merely an executing arm of the Head Office; transfer pricing adjustments for onshore services are sustained as the taxpayer failed to demonstrate arm's-length remuneration. For offshore supplies, the Tribunal concludes the Project Office's post-supply obligations created a taxable nexus in India, justifying attribution under s.9 and Article 7 of the India-China DTAA. The CUP method is rejected as the MAM due to lack of strict comparability; the impugned TP adjustments are consequently upheld.....