Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2013 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (12) TMI 594 - AT - Income TaxTransfer pricing adjustment – Comparable data – Arm’s length price - Held that:- Mere difference in turnover is not sufficient for treating two entities or two transactions as not comparable or warrant any adjustment - Following Symantec Software Solutions P. Ltd. [2011 (5) TMI 107 - ITAT MUMBAI] - Low turnover does not necessarily mean high margin in competitive market condition - Unless and until it is brought to record that the turnover of such comparables has undue influence on the margins, it is not the general rule to exclude the same that too when the comparables are selected by the assessee itself – Following Distributors (Baroda) P. Ltd. v. Union of India [1985 (7) TMI 1 - SUPREME Court] - Commission percentage in associated enterprises segment should be compared with commission percentage in non-associated enterprises segment - Following Bayer Material Science P. Ltd. [2011 (12) TMI 393 - ITAT MUMBAI] - When the indent/commission transaction with the associated enterprises is to be benchmarked, the same should be done with indent/ commission transaction with non-associated enterprises - Decided against the assessee. Legal and professional charges – Held that:- The assessee-company employs foreign nationals for the purpose of its business, as they have requisite expert knowledge of the markets outside India - The assessee-company has many of the foreign nationals, on its rolls, working at various managerial positions - As per the general policy of the assessee-company and the market wide practice, the company at the time of the departure of such foreign assignees, after completion of their assignments, bears the cost of their return journey to their respective home countries - The expenditures were incurred by the assessee on its employees who were returning to their home countries, after completion of the assignments. The expenditures were charges in connection with passenger baggage clearing – Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance of deduction of deposits written off – Held that:- The assessee has debited an amount to the profit and loss account under head "Deposits written off - The AO misread the profit and loss account and amount claimed in the assessment year 2006-07 was understood by him as the amount claimed in the assessment year 2007-08 - The such write off was claimed in the assessment year 2006-07 – The issue was restored for fresh decision.
|