Please click on the categories to the right to find what you are looking for. Click on this icon to download the file. You will need a PDF reader to view the files. You can download one for free from Foxit 1.8 MB or from Adobe 20MB.

(292.3 KiB, 955 DLs)

Download: starlite_transfer_pricing_TNMM.pdf

Transfer Pricing TNMM must be applied to transaction margins and not to enterprise level margins. Adjustments must be confined to international transactions

 

The copy now available (15.7.2010 @ 14.40 hrs) is a better copy. Please re-download if you downloaded earlier.

 

The assessee, engaged in the business of manufacture and export of diamonds and jewellery, claimed that having regard to the nature of the product, none of the transfer pricing methods were applicable for benchmarking the international transactions with associated enterprises. The TPO rejected the argument on the ground that the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) was applicable and made an adjustment by comparing the enterprise level operating margins. This was upheld in principle by the CIT(A). On appeal to the Tribunal, HELD:

 

(i) It is mandatory for an assessee to follow one of the methods prescribed in Rule 10B and demonstrate that the international transactions entered into by it with an associated enterprise are at arms’ length. The argument that no method is applicable is unsustainable;

 

(ii) However, the TPO is wrong in adopting the enterprise level margins as the TNMM. U/s 92F (ii) r.w.s. 10B(e), TNMM requires comparison of net profit margins realized by an enterprise from an international transaction(s) and not comparison of operating margins of enterprises;

 

(iii) Further, the adjustments arising due to computation of ALP should be restricted only to the international transactions and not to the entire turnover of the assessee. No addition can be made to local transactions under Chapter X of the Act.


Related Judgements

  1. Development Consultants vs. DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) 

    Where the assessee entered into “international transactions” with “associated enterprises” and the AO made adjustments to the arms length price, held, deleting the adjustments that:

    (i) In order to determine the most appropriate method for determining the arm’s length price, it is first necessary to select the ‘tested party’ and…

  2. Sony India vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi) 

    Under Rule 10B (2) (c) the comparability of an international transaction with an uncontrolled transaction has to be judged with reference to the contractual terms. Accordingly, the actual transaction, as entered into between the parties, has to be considered and the authorities have no right to re-write the transaction…

  3. DCIT vs. Indo American Jewellery (ITAT Mumbai) 

    The external comparables selected by the assessee were from a public data base and the assessee has followed a detailed search process and made an analysis considering the various factors of selecting the external comparables as required under Transfer Pricing Regulations and Guidelines. Therefore, the transfer pricing study of…

Comments are closed.