TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 255X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e taxpayer. In the absence of working of net profit margin of internal comparables for inbound and outbound services, the issue as to benchmarking the international transactions cannot be decided. Now, the taxpayer has come up with segmental account in tabulated form explained in page 2 3 of the synopsis which is required to be examined by the TPO to benchmark the international transactions. So, the TPO is directed to benchmark the international transactions by applying TNMM on the basis of internal comparables in view of the working supplied by the taxpayer. So, the case is remanded back to the TPO to decide afresh after providing opportunity of being heard to the taxpayer by following the decisions rendered by the Tribunal in AYs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A. Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that with respect to the international transactions of outbound travel services, the appellant is only acting as an intermediary/ reseller and is not adding any Significant value to the services procured from Associated enterprises (AEs) accordingly transactions should be benchmarked applying RPM as the most appropriate method. B. In the case of Inbound travel services, direct and indirect cost of services is identifiable both with respect to the services provided to AEs and to Non AEs, accordingly, Ld. CIT (A) ought to have accepted CPM for determining the arm's length price of the Inbound travel services provided to AEs. C. Ld. CIT (A) failed to present any cogent reasons f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to the above, in law and on facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT (A) erred in considering Club 7 Holiday Ltd. and Indo Asia Leisure Services Ltd. as comparable to the Appellant which are operating in different geography and are also catering to different market. Thus, not fulfilling the comparability criteria laid down as per Rule 10B(f)(2). 6. Without prejudice to the above, in law and on facts and circumstances, Ld. CIT (A) erred in not allowing variation to the extent of (+/-) 5%, while determining the arm's length price of the 'International transaction' as per Section 92C(2). 7. In law and on facts and circumstances of the case the appellant in the interest of justice, may be allowed to adduce ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Inbound Travel Related Services CPM 2,91,53,914 3 Charged Back of Expenses by Assessee - 75,64,684 4 Charged Back of Expenses to assessee (excluding transactions of receipt of management services) - 14,89,349 5 Payment of management fees - 27,74,63,626 3. The taxpayer in order to benchmark its international transactions for outbound travel related services applied internal Resale Price Met ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplying the method of benchmarking the international transactions is covered against the taxpayer by the order passed by the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in taxpayer s own case for AY 2007-08 passed in ITA No.1635/Del/2013 order dated 31.07.2014 whereby internal TNMM has been upheld to benchmark the international transactions and the Tribunal also upheld the segmental accounts which were prepared using sales as the basis for allocation of common expenses and similarly TNMM has been upheld by the Tribunal in taxpayer s own case for AY 2006-07 also decided in ITA No.5534/Del/2010 order dated 08.07.2011 but due to non-availability of segment, addition was made. 8. However, when we examine the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
