Assessee was engaged in business of distribution of solar products-Assessee used RPM as most appropriate method for benchmarking international transactions relating to purchase of solar products and other methods to benchmark transactions of warranty cost claim and reimbursement of expenses. TPO proposed adjustment by selecting TNMM as most appropriate method on ground that war-ranty cost claim and reimbursement of expenses were inextricably inter-linked with transaction of purchase of solar products and they could not survive without each other and, thus, these three transactions were required to be aggregated or clubbed together for benchmarking or determination of ALP. Tribunal deleted the adjustments. On appeal the Court held that warranty cost claim would be reimbursed by AE apart from reimbursement of expenses and amounts so recovered/reimbursed did not comprise of any service element as AE would have borne these expenses directly, had assessee not incurred same and, thus, purchase of solar products/lights on one hand and warranty cost claim on other, were unrelated transactions and could not be aggregated/clubbed.There was no value addition done by assessee on products purchased and subsequently sold by it. On facts, assumption of TPO was erroneous and RPM was most appropriate method.  (AY. 2017-18)