S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Comaprable-Cannot be comparable with business support services-Functionally dissimilar cannot be comparable-Abnormal growth due to restricting cannot be cpmparable-Company had outsourced services to third party vendors cannot be held to be comparable.
S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Capacity utilization adjustment-allowed as the assessee is in the initial years of operation-Matter remanded0 Treatment of depreciation as operating expense-Depreciation held as operating expense for R&D segment considering interlink with manufacturing segment.
S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Comparable-Functionally similar it could not be excluded-TPO applied RPT filter of 25 per cent in case of assessee company, comparable company having RPT of more than 50 per cent could not be accepted as valid comparable-Working capital adjustment is allowed.
S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Cup method-e-mails correspondence is considered as evidence.
S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Resale price method-Trading of telecom network equipments-Selling without any value addition-TPO applied TNM method-Order of TPO was set aside.
S. 92C : Transfer Pricing-if a company was otherwise functionally similar-it could not be excluded only on ground of having a different financial year ending.
S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arms’ length price-Functionally dissimilar companies cannot be taken as comparable.
S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arms’ length price-Pro-rata adjustment considering only associated enterprises.
S. 92B : Transfer Pricing-Arm’s Length price-In absence of any evidence of existence of international transactions between assessee & its foreign associated enterprise arising out of advertisement & marketing promotion determination of Arm’s length price does not arise requiring no transfer pricing adjustment.
S. 92B : Transfer pricing-International transaction-Corporate guarantee is not international transaction prior to amendment of section 92B w.e.f. 1-4-2012.