9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 1056X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... require any specific adjudication. 3. The Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee is challenging the transfer pricing adjustment of Rs 10,34,642/- made on account of interest on outstanding receivables from the Associated Enterprises (AEs). 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee is engaged in rendering design engineering services in the areas of buildings, transport, environment, energy, oil and gas to customers which include AEs as well as third parties. The assessee also undertakes technical consultancy services in the telecom sector for domestic customers. The return of income for the Assessment Year 2018-19 was filed by the assessee on 29-03-2019 declaring total income of Rs. 39, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the impugned transfer pricing adjustment to Rs. 10,34,642/- after considering the delay in receivables beyond 60 days from the AEs. 6. The Learned AR before us made a preliminary argument that interest on outstanding receivables per se could not be construed independently as a separate international transaction and hence no adjustment under chapter X of the Act could be made for the same. This argument of the Learned AR is flawed in view of the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Redington India Limited reported in 430 ITR 298 (Mad) wherein it was held specifically that interest on outstanding receivables would indeed constitute a separate international transaction. Hence the argument advanced by the Learned AR in this r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r from outsiders. In support of this proposition, he placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs Boeing India Pvt limited reported in 457 ITR 84 (Del). Per Contra, the Learned DR vehemently relied on the order of the Learned TPO and the elaborate workings adopted by him for charging the interest invoice wise after allowing credit period of 90 days on delayed receivables from AEs. 8. We find that the decisions relied upon by the Learned AR squarely applies to the facts of the instant case before us. On perusal of financials of the assessee, it is seen that there is no interest expenditure expended by the assessee, which goes to prove that the assessee company is a debt free company. The relian ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ture under section 35DD of the Act based on the assessment order for Assessment Year 2017-18. 10. We have heard the rival submissions and peruse the materials available on record. The assessee vide letter dated 2-8-2021 filed for an additional claim for deduction under section 35DD of the Act of Rs 62,39,102/- being the 1/5th share of Rs 3,11,95,508/-, being the second year of deduction under section 35DD of the Act based on the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act on 22-12-2019 for Assessment Year 2017-18. In Assessment Year 2017-18, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs 3,11,95,508/- towards the amalgamation expenditure which was disallowed by the Learned AO in the scrutiny assessment framed for Assessment Year 2017-18 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
