Tribunal held that , the  onus was on the Assessing Officer to bring on record comparable cases to prove that the payment made by the assessee was in excess of the fair market value and that the payment in his opinion was excessive or unreasonable. The provisions of section 40A(2) are not automatic and can be called into play only if the Assessing Officer establishes that the expenditure incurred is in fact in excess of the fair market value. The Assessing Officer had not doubted the payment made by the assessee to the holding company on account of services rendered by it or brought any comparable case to demonstrate that the payment made by the assessee was excessive. Therefore no disallowance could be made especially in the light of the fact that both the companies were assessed to Income-tax at the maximum marginal rate. The disallowance made by the Assessing Officer was not proper.( AY.2009 10 to 2013-14)