Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Aggrieved, assesse preferred an appeal before Tribunal against the order of CIT (A) in confirming the disallowance of intra-group service fee amounting to Rs.1,51,74,980/-

17. We have hear rival submissions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. We have also gone through the case records and factual details filed by the assessee NLC Nalco India Ltd.AY 2003-04& 2004-05 in its voluminous paper books and also written submissions by both the sides on this issue. Ld. Counsel for the assesse first of all argued that CIT(A)'s main reasoning for confirmation of addition is that no independent documentary evidence had been furnished by assesse to show that the fact of actual services having been rendered to assessee. He also held that Nalco Pacific too could not substantiate the claim for provision of actual services with documentary evidence. For this he argued that the TPO proceeded to judge the reasonableness of the payment made by assesse to Nalco Pacific from his point of view and alleged that the services were more in the nature of directions/management decisions/routine advices which were provided by Nalco Pacific to the assesse to take care of its own interests in the assesse rather than to meet the identified needs of the assesse. The TPO further alleged that though some incidental benefits accrued to assessee, yet such benefits would not be ones for which an independent enterprise would be willing to pay. Based on the aforesaid allegations, he determined the value of the aforesaid international transaction at 'NIL' value. The CIT (A) confirmed the arm's length price computation done by the TPO in his order. Ld. Counsel at this juncture referred to section 92 of the Act provides that any income arising from an international transaction between associated enterprises shall be computed having regard to the arm's length price and any expense or outgoing in an international transaction is also to be computed having regard to the arm's length price. As per the provision of section 92C of the Act read with rule 10B and 10C of the Rules, the arm's length price in relation to an international transaction shall be determined by any of the following methods, being the most appropriate method, such as(a) comparable uncontrolled price method; or (b) resale price method; or (c) cost plus method; or (d) profit split method; or (e) transactional net margin method; or (f) any other method which may be prescribed by the Board.