“interest on outstanding receivables”

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

case and in law, in confirming the Transfer Pricing adjustment amounting to Rs. 5,36,99,972 in respect of alleged notional interest on outstanding receivables due from Associated Enterprises (AES). 4. Without prejudice to above grounds, that on the facts and circumstances of the case ... interest @months LIBOR plus 400 basis points, be not computed on it. 6. After receipt of the replies the AO treated interest on outstanding receivables as a separate international transaction and made addition. 7. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer passed the draft assessment order dated March 31, 2021, incorporating the adjustment

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

following recent decisions in which this issue 14 Concentrix Daksh Services India Pvt. Ltd. has been examined including the impact of interest on outstanding receivables after working capital adjustment and the AOs stand of charging interest on outstanding receivables has been confirmed. (a) Albany Molecular Research Hyderabad Research Center ... adjustment has been granted by the Id. TPO to the assessee for both the years and hence, there cannot be further imputation of interest on outstanding receivables as the same gets subsumed in the working capital adjustment itself. In this regard the Id. AR placed reliance on the decision

Iomedia India Private Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-12(2), New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usm/S. Iomedia India Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, Level-4, Regus Rectangle Circle-12(3), No. 1, D-4, Saket, New Delhi Commercial Complex, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aacci5116N

assessee. The ld. TPO / AO had made an addition on account of transfer pricing adjustment to Arm‟s Length Price (ALP) by imputing interest on outstanding receivables from the AE in respect of invoices which had been realized beyond the agreed credit period of 60 days as granted ... Eligible International Transaction‟ in Rule 10TC is for the purpose of applicability of Safe Harbour Rules only. Hence the international transaction of interest on outstanding receivables does not figure in any of the clauses (i) to (x) in the aforesaid list. Hence the assessee would not be able

At Kearney Ltd.- India Branch Office, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Revenue’s appeals in both assessment years are allowed. 8. Ground No.5 in and ITA No.1306/Del/2011 in Revenue’s appeal are regarding interest on outstanding receivables from the AE. 8.1 Facts of the issue for A.Y.2012-13 are that, the AO/TPO made addition of Rs. 2,86,52,945/- by applying ... submitted that several decisions of Hon'ble Tribunals decided on the issue raised by the assessee of working capital adjustment subsuming the interest on outstanding receivables and categorically gives a finding that working capital adjustment doesn't subsume the within year transactions of outstanding receivables i.e. invoices realized during

At Kearney Ltd.- India Branch Office, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Revenue’s appeals in both assessment years are allowed. 8. Ground No.5 in and ITA No.1306/Del/2011 in Revenue’s appeal are regarding interest on outstanding receivables from the AE. 8.1 Facts of the issue for A.Y.2012-13 are that, the AO/TPO made addition of Rs. 2,86,52,945/- by applying ... submitted that several decisions of Hon'ble Tribunals decided on the issue raised by the assessee of working capital adjustment subsuming the interest on outstanding receivables and categorically gives a finding that working capital adjustment doesn't subsume the within year transactions of outstanding receivables i.e. invoices realized during

DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. A.T. Kearney Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Revenue’s appeals in both assessment years are allowed. 8. Ground No.5 in and ITA No.1306/Del/2011 in Revenue’s appeal are regarding interest on outstanding receivables from the AE. 8.1 Facts of the issue for A.Y.2012-13 are that, the AO/TPO made addition of Rs. 2,86,52,945/- by applying ... submitted that several decisions of Hon'ble Tribunals decided on the issue raised by the assessee of working capital adjustment subsuming the interest on outstanding receivables and categorically gives a finding that working capital adjustment doesn't subsume the within year transactions of outstanding receivables i.e. invoices realized during

DCIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. A.T. Kearney Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Revenue’s appeals in both assessment years are allowed. 8. Ground No.5 in and ITA No.1306/Del/2011 in Revenue’s appeal are regarding interest on outstanding receivables from the AE. 8.1 Facts of the issue for A.Y.2012-13 are that, the AO/TPO made addition of Rs. 2,86,52,945/- by applying ... submitted that several decisions of Hon'ble Tribunals decided on the issue raised by the assessee of working capital adjustment subsuming the interest on outstanding receivables and categorically gives a finding that working capital adjustment doesn't subsume the within year transactions of outstanding receivables i.e. invoices realized during

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]

decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kusum Healthcare is still the binding precedent on the issue of interest on outstanding receivables. Needless to mention that the law laid down by the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Kusum Healthcare was followed

Boeing India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member)

Appellant nor arising out of the transfer pricing proceedings in the case of the Appellant as: 2.1 The benchmarked transaction of interest on outstanding receivables (though disputed) pertains to another entity i.e. BICIPL; 2.2 An identical addition has also been made in the transfer pricing proceedings for BICIPL ... AO/DRP grossly erred in not appreciating that since the Appellant did not have any business operations during FY 2016-17, the issue of interest on outstanding receivables does not arise in the year under consideration. 5. On the facts, in the circumstances of the case

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

raised by the assessee challenging the transfer pricing adjustment made by the ld AO/ TPO with regard to imputing interest on outstanding receivables from AEs. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee company was incorporated in 2007 as part of separation ... that the provisions of section 92CA(2B) of the Act which is with retrospective effect from 01.06.2002 sought to consider the imputation of interest on outstanding receivables from AE also as a separate international transaction even though the same was not considered by the assessee in the TPSR

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

raised by the assessee challenging the transfer pricing adjustment made by the ld AO/ TPO with regard to imputing interest on outstanding receivables from AEs. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee company was incorporated in 2007 as part of separation ... that the provisions of section 92CA(2B) of the Act which is with retrospective effect from 01.06.2002 sought to consider the imputation of interest on outstanding receivables from AE also as a separate international transaction even though the same was not considered by the assessee in the TPSR

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

raised by the assessee challenging the transfer pricing adjustment made by the ld AO/ TPO with regard to imputing interest on outstanding receivables from AEs. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee company was incorporated in 2007 as part of separation ... that the provisions of section 92CA(2B) of the Act which is with retrospective effect from 01.06.2002 sought to consider the imputation of interest on outstanding receivables from AE also as a separate international transaction even though the same was not considered by the assessee in the TPSR

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

which is sought to be imputed gets subsumed in the working capital adjustment itself. Hence, there is no need for separate imputation 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 ... with receivables from AEs, since the payables are more than the receivables there would be no requirement for imputing interest on outstanding receivables from the AEs. The ld AR also submitted that the ld TPO had committed calculation mistake while working out the imputation of interest on outstanding receivables

Egis International S.A., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-Int. Tax 1(2)(2), New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2016-17 Egis International S.A. Vs. Acit T-305, Tf, Circle-1Nt. Tax 1(2)(2) Tirupati Plaza, New Delhi. Sector-11 (Mlu), Pocket 4, Plot No. 11 Dwarka, New Delhi – 110 075. Pan Aabcb7760L (Appellant) (Respondent)

outstanding receivables/ payables 14. The Ld AO/ Ld TPO/ Ld CIT(A) erred on the facts by applying SBI rate for imputing interest on outstanding receivables whereas the Appellant primarily transact in foreign currency with the AES. 15. The Ld AO/ Ld TPO/ Ld CIT(A) grossly erred on facts