THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , FARIDABAD vs. M/S OSRAM INDIA PVT LTD

H and relating to Income Tax ‘ITAT’) whe CIT(Appeals) II(1), New D material chan revenue has o for the purpos for re-openin revenue has depart from th HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR I D IPAL COMMISSIOINER OF I

L order passed Rule10B (2) Rules’) and b order. 4. L order passed rightly not ac for the purpo 2008-2009. It the comparab in which the same is mand the earlier p determination compared. 5. L does not say t current year’s data for achie length price w 6. L of Rule 10B( with filters. 7. W O&M) Page 2 of 4 Learned counsel for the appellan d by the TPO was in confo and 10B(4) of the Income Ta both CIT(Appeals) and the ITAT Learned counsel for the appella by the TPO to submit that the cepted by the TPO with regard ose of determining the margin t is submitted that as per Rule 1 le transaction should be the data tax payer has entered into the i datory. While proviso to 10(b) ( eriod data that the same wou n of transfer prices in relati Learned counsel for the appell that the successive year’s data ca s data and the TPO has, theref eving the comparable for the int with associated enterprise. Learned counsel for the appellan 2) only the current year data is We have considered the submissi nt has strenuously argued that the rmity with the provisions of ax Rules, 1962 (for short ‘the T have erred in setting aside the ant has taken this Court to the e tax payer’s submissions were to having used multiple air data ns of comparables for the year 0B (4) of the Rules, the data of a pertaining to the financial year international transaction and the 4) also mentions of considering uld only have an influence of ion to the transactions being lant submits that the provision an be considered excluded in the fore, rightly applied the current ternational transactions at arm’s nt has also argued that in terms required to be examined along ions.

T factual. Tho details and as would be app m w t a w 2 o a c h a o l m a c T t c c f t o C f o O&M) Page 3 of 4 The aspects raised by the appell ugh the CIT(A) as well as ITA s discussed by the TPO and a fin osite to quote:- “10. We have heard the riv material available on record. The with respect to the working capital he assessee and allowed by the L after considering the fact that th working capital adjustment to the 2011-12 and after relying on the order has held that assessee is adjustment. We find that the Co-or case of Sony Mobile Communicatio held that working capital adjustm assessee if it is a service industry. order to neutralize the differences ow inventory, trade payables and may be, it becomes eminent to allow as to bring the case of the assesse comparable entities. It has further, Tribunal in the case of Navisite In hat the component of working considered on annual basis with closing figures. 11. Before us, Revenue has n feature in the facts of the case in th hat of the earlier year. Revenue h on record to demonstrate that th CIT(A) has been stayed/set asid forum. In such a situation, we find order of CIT(A) and thus the groun ant before this Court are purely AT have examined the facts in nding has been arrived at which val submissions and perused the e issue in the present ground is l adjustment that was sought by Ld CIT(A). We find that CIT(A) he TPO has himself given the e assessee in A.Ys. 2010-11 & e various decisions cited in his s entitled to work in capital rdinate Bench of Tribunal in the on International SB (supra) has ment cannot be denied to the It has further observed that in on account of carrying high or d trade receivables, as the case w working capital adjustment so ee at par with other functionally by relying on the decision of the India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO has held g capital deployed should be h the average of opening and not pointed to any distinguishing he year under consideration and has also not placed any material he decision relied upon by the de/overruled by higher judicial d no reason to interfere with the d of Revenue is dismissed.”

I Assessees’ ca 2011-2012, 2 the TPO him considered fo subsequent as the inclusion Moreso, as e taken into con made for ea authorities, th departure. 10. I law which ne findings of th and is accordi 11. A accordingly.