Pr. CIT v. Kusum Health Care Pvt. Ltd.

Lokesh Kumar Aggarwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-45(5), Delhi

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

…d not file the details before the Ld. TPO and the ld. CIT(A) also did not verify the above contention/submission of the assessee. On the issue of interest on receivables the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Kusum Health Care Pvt. Ltd.(2017) 398 ITR 66(Del.) in para no.10 and 11 has observed as under:- “10. The court is unable to agree with the above submissions. The inclusion in the Explanation to section 92B of the Act of the expression "receivables" does not mean that dehors the context every item of "receivables" appearing in the accounts of an international transaction. There may be a del…

Gates India Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-10(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I” DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.2379/DEL/2022 Assessment Year 2018-19 Gates India Pvt. Ltd., ACIT, C-434, Defence Colony South, Vs. Circle-10(1), New Delhi. Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAOCS8090D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv. Shri Rohit Tiwari, Adv. Respondent by: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-(DR) Date of hearing: 12 06 2024 Date of pronouncement: 22 08 2024 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the final as…

Alcatel Lucent India Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-15, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyaassessment Year: 2018-19

…on 92B of the Act. In this context, he drew our attention to the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in case of Techbooks International Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT – ITA No. 788/Del/2016 dated 10.10.2022. He submitted, in case of PCIT vs. Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. – 398 ITR 66 (Delhi 2017), Hon'ble Delhi High Court has laid down certain parameters for making adjustment on account of delayed receivables. He submitted, one of the parameters laid down is inquiry/examination has to be conducted by the TPO by analyzing the 17 & SA No.199/Del/2023 statistics over a period of time to discern a pattern which would indicate t…

Jubilant Pharmova Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. ACIT-1, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

…is no requirement for separate additions on account of interest on outstanding receivables. Further in all these cases, besides other cases, the assessee has relied on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. 398 ITR 66 (Delhi 2017. After considering the various grounds raised by the assesseee in those cases, the Hon'ble Respective ITATs has rejected the assessee's contentions and considered the interest on outstanding receivables as separate international transactions which is required to be benchmarked 13 Jubilant Pharmova Ltd. separately and assessee was foun…

Concentrix Daksh Services India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

…delayed receivables as assessee is a debt free company  Receivables outstanding ought to be netted-off with trade payables to AE. Further the assessee has also relied upon the order of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. 398 ITR 66 (Delhi 2017). All the grounds raised by assessee aren't tenable because of the following reasons. 7 Concentrix Daksh Services India Pvt. Ltd. A. The AO/TPO order on Interest on delayed receivables fulfills all the conditions laid down by the Hon'ble High Court decision in the case of PCIT vs. Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. 398 ITR 66 (Delhi 2017) and…

Tci-Go Vacation India Private Limited, Gurugram vs. ACIT Circle 3(1) Int Tax, Gurugram

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2018-19]

…appeal before us. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the DRP has erred in distinguishing the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. 398 ITR 66 (Del). The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted this issue is covered in favour of the assessee. He submitted that the notional interest cannot be added to the receivables from the AE. He submitted that the assessee is debt free company and 100% business with the AE and that no interest has been paid nor received from any third party. Further…

Bsc C&C Joint Venture, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-61(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI G.S. PANNU (Vice President), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

…d or sum receivable and was subsequently written off in 2017-18 to prove the contention that it is neither money advanced nor sum receivable. 33. At this stage the observations of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Kusum Healthcare (P) Ltd. (398 ITR 66) are very much relevant and they are as follows: “10. The court is unable to agree with the above submissions. The inclusion in the Explanation to section 92B of the Act of the expression "receivables" does not mean that dehors the context every item of "receivables" appearing in the accounts of an entity, which may have dealings with foreign asso…

Egis International S.A.S. (Earlier Known As Egis International S.A.), New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-1(2)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

…e receivables has already been factored and is already subsumed in the working capital adjustment. To support such proposition, the learned Counsel referred to the judgment rendered by the Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. 398 ITR 66. The learned Counsel thus submitted that no transfer pricing adjustment on account of overdue receivable by the foreign assessee is called for. 5. Learned DR for the Revenue, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of the lower authorities. 6. On careful consideration of the rival submissions, we find merit in the plea of the assessee that the…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. American Express (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2014-15 American Express (India) Pvt. Vs. Jcit, Ltd., Special Range-1, 7Th Floor, Mgf Metropolitan New Delhi Saket, Office Block District Centre, Saket, New Delhi Pan :Aaaca8163F (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Vs. American Express (India) Special Range-1, Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi Metropolitan Saket, 7Th Floor, Office Block District Centre, Saket, New Delhi Pan :Aaaca8163F (Appellant) (Respondent)

…he assessee contested the aforesaid addition before learned first appellate authority. After considering the submissions of the assessee and keeping in view the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of PCIT Vs. Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., 398 ITR 66 (Delhi), learned first appellate authority held that since the interest element pertaining to receivables gets subsumed in the working capital adjustment margin, no separate adjustment is required to be made. Accordingly, he deleted the addition. 12. Before us, learned Departmental Representative submitted that the interest on account of delaye…

American Express (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, Special, Range-1, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2014-15 American Express (India) Pvt. Vs. Jcit, Ltd., Special Range-1, 7Th Floor, Mgf Metropolitan New Delhi Saket, Office Block District Centre, Saket, New Delhi Pan :Aaaca8163F (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Vs. American Express (India) Special Range-1, Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi Metropolitan Saket, 7Th Floor, Office Block District Centre, Saket, New Delhi Pan :Aaaca8163F (Appellant) (Respondent)

…he assessee contested the aforesaid addition before learned first appellate authority. After considering the submissions of the assessee and keeping in view the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of PCIT Vs. Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., 398 ITR 66 (Delhi), learned first appellate authority held that since the interest element pertaining to receivables gets subsumed in the working capital adjustment margin, no separate adjustment is required to be made. Accordingly, he deleted the addition. 12. Before us, learned Departmental Representative submitted that the interest on account of delaye…

Bsc C&C Joint Venture, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-61(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2017-18

…d or sum receivable and was subsequently written off in 2017-18 to prove the contention that it is neither money advanced nor sum receivable. 33. At this stage the observations of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Kusum Healthcare (P) Ltd. (398 ITR 66) are very much relevant and they are as follows: “10. The court is unable to agree with the above submissions. The inclusion in the Explanation to section 92B of the Act of the expression "receivables" does not mean that dehors the context every item of "receivables" appearing in the accounts of an entity, which may have dealings with foreign asso…

Teradata India Pvt Ltd, Grugram vs. DCIT Circle-3(1), Gurugram

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

…e. 10. At the outset, we find that the assessee had not submitted the invoice-wise details of outstanding receivables from its AEs before the ld TPO. We have gone though the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kusum Healthcare reported in 398 ITR 66 (supra). The relevant observations are reproduced herein below:- “10. The Court is unable to agree with the above submissions. The inclusion in the Explanation to Section 92B of the Act of the expression 'receivables' does not mean that de hors the context every item of receivables' appearing in the accounts of an entity, which may have dealings…

ACIT-Circle-3(1), Gurgaon vs. Teradata India Private Limited, Gurgaon

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

…e. 10. At the outset, we find that the assessee had not submitted the invoice-wise details of outstanding receivables from its AEs before the ld TPO. We have gone though the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kusum Healthcare reported in 398 ITR 66 (supra). The relevant observations are reproduced herein below:- “10. The Court is unable to agree with the above submissions. The inclusion in the Explanation to Section 92B of the Act of the expression 'receivables' does not mean that de hors the context every item of receivables' appearing in the accounts of an entity, which may have dealings…

Teradata India P.Ltd, Gurugram vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Gurugram

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

…e. 10. At the outset, we find that the assessee had not submitted the invoice-wise details of outstanding receivables from its AEs before the ld TPO. We have gone though the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kusum Healthcare reported in 398 ITR 66 (supra). The relevant observations are reproduced herein below:- “10. The Court is unable to agree with the above submissions. The inclusion in the Explanation to Section 92B of the Act of the expression 'receivables' does not mean that de hors the context every item of receivables' appearing in the accounts of an entity, which may have dealings…

Delphi Automotive Systems (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaaptive Components India P. Ltd, Vs. Deputy Commissioner (Formerly Known As Delphi Of Income-Tax, Automotive Systems P. Ltd), Circle-7(1), P-24, Green Park Extension, New Delhi South Delhi, New Delhi-110016 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacd0226E

…mputation of interest on outstanding receivables. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Aptiv Components India P. Ltd Pr. CIT vs. Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.765/2016 dated 25.04.2017 reported in 398 ITR 66. 21.3. The ld AR before us filed an application before us in terms of Rule 29 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 furnishing the following details:- a. Details in respect of realization of invoices raised during the year by the assessee in the business support services segment; b. Details in respect of realization of invoices outstan…

JCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Daawat Foods Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

…stment in respect of 16 Cross I.T.A. Nos. 1758 & 2387/Del/2017 receivables from AE is un-warranted. The ld. Counsel submits that while holding so the Tribunal followed the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kusum Health Care Pvt. Ltd. [398 ITR 66]. 24. On the other hand, the ld. DR strongly placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below. 25. Heard rival submissions perused the orders of the authorities below and the decisions relied on. On perusal of the order of the Tribunal in the case of assessee’s group entity, namely, L.T. Foods Ltd. Vs. DCIT (supra) an identical issue has b…

Dawat Foods Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

…stment in respect of 16 Cross I.T.A. Nos. 1758 & 2387/Del/2017 receivables from AE is un-warranted. The ld. Counsel submits that while holding so the Tribunal followed the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kusum Health Care Pvt. Ltd. [398 ITR 66]. 24. On the other hand, the ld. DR strongly placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below. 25. Heard rival submissions perused the orders of the authorities below and the decisions relied on. On perusal of the order of the Tribunal in the case of assessee’s group entity, namely, L.T. Foods Ltd. Vs. DCIT (supra) an identical issue has b…