Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.28 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 154 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Gavireddygari Aparna Kalyani, ... vs Acit, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad on 28 February, 2023
5. By way of impugned order, learned DRP, placing reliance on the
decisions of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of McKinsey
knowledge Centre India (P) Ltd (2018) 96 Taxmann.com 237 (Delhi) and
other decisions, rejected the contention of the assessee as to the nature
of transaction and held that the deferred receivables constitute a separate
international transaction and has to be benchmarked on account of delay,
beyond the reasonable credit period as per Transfer Pricing regulations.
Learned DRP rejected the other contention of the assessee that
outstanding amount gets adjusted in working capital adjustment and that
a separate adjustment is not required, while referring to the view taken by
the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of BechtelIndia (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT
[2017] 85 taxmann.com 121 (Delhi - Trib.). On the plea of the assessee as
to not charging interest from AEs, learned DRP directed the assessee to
submit complete information relating to payables to AEs and non-AEs such
as date of invoice, credit period, date of payment, period of delay with
supporting invoices before the learned TPO within a week from the date
of receipt of the order and simultaneously, the learned TPO was directed
to complete the interest liability on payables on similar basis and adjust
the same against the interest on receivables. Learned DRP put a specific
rider that if the assessee fails to submit the complete information as
directed, no inference would be called for on the adjustment proposed by
the learned TPO by way of determination of ALP of deferred receivables.
Apache Footwear India Private Limited, ... vs Acit, Circle-1(1), Tirupati on 16 January, 2023
The Co-ordinate Benches of the
Tribunal followed the above view, and in the cases of Zeta Interactive
Systems (India) (P) Ltd., (supra), Satyam ventures (supra) and Apache
Footwear India Pvt. Ltd (Supra) held that outstanding receivables is an
international transaction, any extra credit in excess of 30 days requires a
separate benchmarking and notional interest at 6% is a fair and reasonable
one. In these decisions the request of the assessee to apply the interest at
LIBOR + points were considered and rejected.
The Income Tax Act, 1961
1