Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (9) TMI 1661 - AT - Income TaxTP adjustment - upward adjustment on account of Corporate and Bank Guarantee charges - HELD THAT:- Following the decision of Bharti Airtel Ltd. [2014 (3) TMI 495 - ITAT DELHI] it held that since there is no cost involved in accepting the Corporate guarantee, it will not constitute an international transaction. The DRP directed the AO/TPO to follow the above decision of the Tribunal for this assessment year also. Downward adjustment in respect of trademark, license fee paid by the assessee to that singapore company - DRP have given direction in deleting the additions made by way of ALP adjustment made in the case of Trademark/license Fees and Corporate/Bank Guarantee stands at ‘Nil’ to the TPO by following the Chennai Tribunal’s decision in assessee's own case for assessment year 2009-10 [2014 (10) TMI 669 - ITAT CHENNAI] - HELD THAT:- It is not the case of the Ld. DR that the impugned tribunal decisions are stayed by the Hon’ble High Court. Since the DRP has followed the decisions of Tribunal [2015 (8) TMI 40 - ITAT CHENNAI] for assessment year 2009-10 in assessee's own case, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the DRP on the above issues and accordingly, the grounds raised by Revenue are dismissed. Disallowance u/s.14A r.w Rule-8D - assessee contended that since no exempt income is earned , disallowance u/s.14A would not arise - HELD THAT:- The assessee has not taken the plea that the impugned investment is made in its subsidiary and hence it would not fall under section 14A r. w rule 8D , as per the ratio reported in EIH Associated Hotels Ltd. [2013 (9) TMI 604 - ITAT CHENNAI] before the lower authorities. Thus, the factual matrix stand unverified. In the facts and circumstances, this issue is remitted back to the AO for due verification and application.
|