Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 478 - AT - Income TaxTPA - computation of ALP of the Manufacturing as well as Trading segment by excluding Foreign Exchange Gain/Loss (forex) - inclusion or otherwise of forex gain/loss in the computation of operating margin under the TNMM both for the assessee as well as the comparables - HELD THAT:- There is no doubt that in such rules, forex gain/loss has been treated as non-operating. However it is pertinent to note that such rules are not applicable to the assessment year under consideration. Even the reliance of the DR on certain decisions taking cognizance of safe harbour rules for the period anterior to their insertion in other contexts, does not improve the case of the Department. Following the judgment in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ameriprise India Private Limited [2016 (3) TMI 1272 - DELHI HIGH COURT] holding foreign exchange gains earned by the assessee, which is in relation to trading items and emanating from international transactions, cannot be treated as non-operating losses and gains, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT VS. B.C. Management Services Pvt. Ltd. [2017 (12) TMI 255 - DELHI HIGH COURT] reiterated held that foreign exchange fluctuation in relation to trading transactions, prior to safe harbor rules from 2013, is operating gain or loss. The amount of foreign exchange gain/loss arising out of trading transactions is required to be considered as an item of operating revenue/cost, both for the assessee as well as the comparables. The ground taken by the assessee is, therefore, allowed. Availability of +-5% benefit in determining the ALP - NIL ALP of the international transaction of Payment of management fees - HELD THAT:- Second proviso to section 92C(2) provides that if the variation between the ALP and the price at which the international transaction has actually been undertaken does not exceed the specified margin, which at the material time was 5%, then the price at which the international transaction has actually been undertaken shall be deemed to be the ALP. The effect of this proviso is that so long as the difference between the ALP as determined by applying one of the specified methods and the price at which the international transaction was undertaken is within the prescribed percentage, no transfer pricing adjustment can be made. This proviso was substituted by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01-10-2009. Explanation to sub-section (2) of section 92C has clarified : “that the provisions of the second proviso shall also be applicable to all assessment or reassessment proceedings pending before the Assessing Officer as on 1st October, 2009”. Thus, it is overt that even for the assessment year under consideration, namely, 2010-11, the benefit of the second proviso would be available by virtue of the Explanation given at the end of sub-section (2) of 92C. We, therefore, hold that the CIT(A) was justified in extending the benefit of +/-5% margin in determining the ALP of the international transactions. This ground of the Revenue fails. Exclusion of additional companies selected by the TPO from the list of comparables - HELD THAT:- AR, at the very outset, submitted that even if all the companies directed to be excluded by the ld. first appellate authority, against which the Revenue has come up in appeal before the Tribunal, are included, its profit margin would be within the permissible range of +/-5%, if forex gain is treated as an item of operating nature. DR did not dispute this position. In view of the rival but common submissions, though we technically accept the ground of the Revenue, but it would not lead to increase in the total income by reason of any transfer pricing addition. We set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the file of AO/TPO for a fresh determination of the ALP of the international transaction of Trading segment in conformity with the foregoing discussion.
|