Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (12) TMI 1774

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssee- company had not produced any evidence in support of rendering of services before the TPO. It is only before us, by way of additional evidence, assessee-company has filed some material, in support of the actual services rendered by the AE. CIT(A) had no occasion to examine this evidence as it was claimed that this evidence was filed for the first time before us . CIT(A), without examining the aspect of actual rendition of services by the AE in respect of IT services, had directed the allowance of expenditure. Therefore, in interests of justice, we restore this issue to the file of the AO for purposes of verification of this evidence and come to conclusion whether the services are actually rendered by the AE or not and direct the TPO/AO to bench mark the transaction of rendering of services of market management support services, after being satisfied himself that the services are actually rendered by the AE. On the principle of consistency, we hold that each assessment year is separate and distinct. The principles of res judicata have no application to income-tax assessment proceedings. Simply because in the preceding year, this expenditure came to be allowed without any .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as filed on 29/11/2011 declaring 'nil' income. The assessee- company also reported the following international transactions in its 92CE report: The assessee-company also submitted Transfer Pricing (TP) study report applying TNMM as the most appropriate method and 12 comparables were selected by the tax-payer in respect of software development services segment where profit margin was calculated at 13.71%. The Assessing Officer (AO) selected the case for scrutiny and referred the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) for the purpose of bench marking international transaction. 3. The TPO accepted the transfer pricing study report submitted by the assessee company in respect of software development services segment, receipt and re-imbursement by comparing the net margins under TNMM and held that International transactions relating to software development service, receipt and reimbursement are at arm's length and therefore no transfer pricing adjustment was suggested by the TPO. However, in respect of management fee, technical support and professional fees which are called as 'intra-group services', the TPO applied CUP method. The TPO rejected the conten .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and for assessment year 2007-08 in ITA No.1169/Bang/2011 dated 25/1/2017, the Hon'ble Tribunal has set aside this issue to the file of the AO. Therefore, it is submitted that the issue may be restored back to the file of the AO for fresh consideration. 10. We heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The issue of determining ALP adjustment in respect of management fee to intra-group services, had come up before the co-ordinate bench to which the Hon'ble Accountant Member is the author, in the case of M/s. 3M India Ltd.,in IT(TP)A No.725/Bang/2011 dated 13/05/2016. No ALP adjustment can be made in respect of intra-group services for the reason that no benefit was derived by the assessee-company by incurring such expenditure and also the TPO cannot question necessity of incurring such expenditure. This Tribunal held that it is incumbent upon the assessee- company to prove that services are actually received by the assessee- company and failing to do so may result in ALP adjustment. The mandatory condition or making no ALP adjustment is that the assessee- company should prove by leading necessary evidence on record that services are actually received. Fail .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that the expenditure was a profitable one or that in fact any profit was earned . In CIT v. Walchand Co. etc., (1967) 65 ITR 381, it was held by the Supreme Court that in applying the test of commercial expediency for determining whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be judged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the Revenue. It was further observed that the rule that expenditure can only be justified if there is corresponding increase in the profits was erroneous. It has been classically observed by Lord Thankerton in Hughes v. Bank of New Zealand, (1938) 6 ITR 636 that expenditure in the course of the trade which is unremunerative is none the less a proper deduction if wholly and exclusively made for the purposes of trade. It does not require the presence of a receipt on the credit side to justify the deduction of an expense . The question whether an expenditure can be allowed as a deduction only if it has resulted in any income or profits came to be considered by the Supreme Court again in CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody, (1978) 115 ITR 519, and it was observed as under: - .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d he not incurred such expenditure. These are irrelevant considerations for the purpose of Rule 10B. Whether or not to enter into the transaction is for the assessee to decide. The quantum of expenditure can no doubt be examined by the TPO as per law but in judging the allowability thereof as business expenditure, he has no authority to disallow the entire expenditure or a part thereof on the ground that the assessee has suffered continuous losses. The financial health of assessee can never be a criterion to judge allowability of an expense; there is certainly no authority for that. What the TPO has done in the present case is to hold that the assessee ought not to have entered into the agreement to pay royalty/ brand fee, because it has been suffering losses continuously. So long as the expenditure or payment has been demonstrated to have been incurred or laid out for the purposes of business, it is no concern of the TPO to disallow the same on any extraneous reasoning. As provided in the OECD guidelines, he is expected to examine the international transaction as he actually finds the same and then make suitable adjustment but a wholesale disallowance of the expenditure, particula .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Thus, the assessee failed to discharge the burden of proving that the expenditure laid out were incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. We may further add that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Imperial Chemical Industries (Ind.) Pvt. Ltd (1969) 74 ITR 17 has unequivocally held that the burden of proving that a particular expenditure had been aid out or incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business entirely lies on the assessee. The discharge of the burden had to be effective and meaningful and not to cover up by merely book entries and paper work. The mere fact of payment of commission by account payee cheques and compliances with the TDS provisions shall not alone enable the assessee to claim deduction unless and amount has been expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. 11. A Co-ordinate Bench Tribunal of Delhi in the case of Kanu Kitchen Kulture (P)Ltd Vs DCIT (2013) 28 ITR (T) 49 (Del.-Trib.) held that whether the assessee failed to demonstrate the services rendered by the commission agent, the commission was disallowed. The relevant paras of the judgment are reproduced below; 22. Thus the assessee a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h huge amounts of money over a period of time . 13, The Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi in the case of Printer House Pvt.Ltd. Vs DCIT (Del.) authored by Accountant Member, after referring to the above precedence on this issue held as follows: Thus, having regard to the ratio laid down in the above cases that in the absence of proof in support of the services rendered by the commission agent, no commission can be allowed as a deduction. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee and allow the appeals filed by the revenue . 14. In the present case, the learned CIT(A) had not examined any evidence to show that the agents have actually rendered their services. The learned CIT(A) had totally misdirected himself by examining the issue from the angle of tax deducted at source and he had failed to examine whether the services are actually rendered by the commission agents or not. Therefore, we are unable to sustain the order of the learned CIT(A) and hold that the commission payments in question are not allowable keeping in view the ratio laid down in the cases cited supra. The assessee company had miserably failed to demonstrate the actual services rendered by the agents .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the ITAT: i. Asst. CIT vs. Anima Investment Ltd. (2000) 73 ITD 125(Delhi); ii. Asst. CIT vs. Arunodoi Apartments (P) Ltd. (2002) 123 Taxman 48(Gau.) The Courts have held that appeals are not to be decided for giving 'one more innings' to the lower authorities in the appellate jurisdiction. i. Rajesh Babubhai Damania vs. CIT (2001) (251 ITR 541)(Guj. ii. CIT vs. Harikishan Jethalal Patel (1987) 168 ITR 472 (Guj) Remand not for the benefit of the party seeking it to fill up gaps. Even the Hon'ble jurisdiction High Court in the case of Karnataka Wakf Board vs. State of Karnataka, reported in AIR 1996 Kar.55 at pages 63 64 held as under: Where the party had an opportunity of adducing evidence in the case but with open eyes failed to adduce that evidence, the case should not be remanded to give a second chance to the party to adduce that evidence. The policy of the law is that once that matter has been fairly tried between the parties, it should not, except in special circumstances, be reopened and retrieved. In a recent decision their Lordships of the Supreme Court laid down that power to order retrial after remand, where there had already been .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates