9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 213X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee are bonafide which really prevented the assessee to file the present appeal in time. Therefore, the delay of 177 days are condoned. 3. The Revenue raised as many as 6 grounds amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration is as to whether the CIT(A) is justified in deleting the adjustment of Rs. 14,71,41,219/- made by the AO/TPO on account of management services fees in the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. We note that the assessee is a Joint Venture between Anand Automotive Systems and Dana Corporation, USA. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of drive train components. During the year under consideration the assessee entered into domestic transaction with M/s. Asia Invest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have adjudicated the issue of ALP of management services afresh and should have considered the findings of TPO that the assessee has failed to prove the commensurate benefit from the payment and also failed to quantify the amount of each service rendered. The CIT(A) has relied upon for deleting the adjustment of management fees had analyzed the allowability of management services fees in respect of section 37(1) of the Act and not whether the payment of management fees was at ALP. The requirement for expenditure to be allowed u/s. 37(1) is different than that of specified domestic transaction related to intra-group services. The transfer pricing provisions are special provisions relating to avoidance of tax and override general provisions s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re of services rendered by AE, the TPO is justified in holding that the assessee has not proved any commensurate benefits against the payment of service charges and he argued the TPO in the present case was justified in making the adjustment of ALP u/s. 92CA of the Act. 8. To sum up, the ld. DR argued that the CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the transfer pricing proceedings are different and standards which are applicable to deductibility of expenditure in the context of normal provisions such as section 37 of the Act cannot be applicable to the transactions between associated enterprises governed by the transfer pricing provisions. Further, the CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that not only the evidence regarding rendering of services ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raining for the field staff on regular basis to ensure improvement in their marketing skills and such programmes would be available for assessee staff also. Direct cost of participation in these programs of staff sponsored by assessee. 11. To substantiate the above said two services, the assessee filed evidences at Page Nos. 65, 66 to 74, 75, 76 to 103, 104 to 246, 247 to 287, 288 to 328 all these evidences were filed before the TPO but however the TPO held no evidences filed to substantiate the claim of payment of management fees to AIPL. The only contention raised by the ld. DR is that the CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the transfer pricing proceedings are different and standards which are applicable to deductibility of expenditure ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
