DCIT, CHENNAI V. M/s. Funskool (India) Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 110/CHNY/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0755 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 1 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-02-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 13-02-2013
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 21-01-2008
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAJI P JACOBADDL
• Assessee Lawyers: R VIJAYARAGHAVAN
• Keywords: Transfer pricing; International transaction

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.110/MDS/2008 ASST. YEARS : 2004-05 THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE II(1), CHENNAI 600 034. (APPELLANT) V. M/S. FUNSKOOL (INDIA) LIMITED 6 TH FLOOR, ANNA SALAI, TARAPORE TOWERS, CHENNAI 600 002. PAN : AAACF0422G. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MR. SHAJI P. JACOB, A DDL.CIT RESPONDENT BY : MR. R. VIJAYARAGHAVAN DATE OF HEARING : 13 FEB 2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26 FEB 20 13 O R D E R PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS A TRANSFER PRICING APPEAL FILED BY THE RE VENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-IX, CHENNAI DATED 16.10.2007 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2004-05 . THE ONLY GRIEVANCE IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF ITA 110/MDS/08 2 INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF B.1,34,17,582/- MADE TOWARDS ARMS LENGTH PRICE BY T HE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE TPO. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINE SS OF MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF TOYS, GAMES AND PUZZLES. A SSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 28.10.2004 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT B1,37,49,338/-. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED UNDER SEC.143(3) OF THE ACT ON 28.12.2006 DETERMINING TOTAL INCOME AT B .2,91,66,920/-. WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFI CER MADE ADDITION OF B.1,34,17,582/- TOWARDS ADJUSTMENT FOR DIFFERENCE IN PRICE AS SUGGESTED BY THE TPO WHILE ARRIVING AT ARMS LEN GTH PRICE. THE TPO PASSED ORDER UNDER SEC.92CA(3) DATED 18.12.200 6 COMPUTED THE ARMS LENGTH PRICE AT B.6,53,40,248/- AS AGAINST THE VALUE OF SALE OF TOYS AS ADMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AT B.5,19,22,66 6/- WHEREBY MAKING AN ADJUSTMENT FOR DIFFERENCE IN PRICE AT B.1 ,34,17,582/-. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY EXPORTED TOYS TO ITS ASSOCIATED EN TERPRISE (AE) HASBRO INTERNATIONAL INC. USA. DURING THE ASST. Y EAR 2004-05 THE ASSESSEE HAS ENTERED INTO INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTION WITH ITS ITA 110/MDS/08 3 ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE, NAMELY HASBRO INTERNATIONAL INC. USA., WHICH WAS HAVING 40% SHARE HOLDING IN THE ASSESSEE COMPAN Y, IN RESPECT OF EXPORT OF TOYS, IMPORT OF TOYS, PAYMENT OF LEASE RENT OF MOULDS, COMMISSION ON EXPORT AND RE-IMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO B.6,44,48,631/-. 3. IN RESPECT OF EXPORT OF TOYS THE ASSESSEE ADOP TED CUP METHOD AS THE MOST APPROPRIATE METHOD ON THE SALES MADE TO ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE. THIS METHOD IS ACCEPTED BY THE TPO. THE ASSESSEE MADE PRICE ADJUSTMENT WHILE ARRIVING AT T HE ARMS LENGTH PRICE IN RESPECT OF EXPENSES INCURRED FOR MARKETING , SALES, ADVERTISEMENT, ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS OF THE AS SESSEE SINCE ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, THESE ITEMS ARE EXCLUSIV ELY MEANT FOR DOMESTIC SALES OF THE PRODUCTS ONLY. THE EXPENSES INCURRED IN THESE DEPARTMENTS ARE TOWARDS ADVERTISEMENT, SALARIES, IN CLUDING SALES INCENTIVES, DAILY ALLOWANCES, RATES AND TAXES, OCTR OI, TRAVELLING ETC. THE ASSESSEE ALSO MADE PRICE ADJUSTMENT TOWARDS QUA NTITY DISCOUNTS IN ARRIVING AT ARMS LENGTH PRICE. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO MADE PRICE ITA 110/MDS/08 4 ADJUSTMENT TOWARDS TRANSPORTATION COSTS, EXCISE DUT Y, MARKET RETURNS, CREDIT RISKS WHICH ARE ALL ACCEPTED BY THE TPO. THE TPO WHILE ARRIVING AT ARMS LENGTH PRICE ON THE EXPORT O F TOYS, ALLOWED ADJUSTMENTS ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF 4.28% TOWARDS EXP ENSES INCURRED IN CONNECTION WITH ADVERTISEMENT, MARKETING, SALES AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS AS AGAINST 34.48% ADOPTE D BY THE ASSESSEE. IN RESPECT OF QUANTITY DISCOUNTS, THE T PO ALLOWED ADJUSTMENT AT 1.98% AS AGAINST 15% ADOPTED BY THE A SSESSEE. THE REASON FOR ALLOWING ADJUSTMENT ONLY AT 4.28% AS AGA INST 34.48% TOWARDS EXPENSES ON ADVERTISEMENT, SALES, MARKETING AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS IS THAT THE ASSESSEE PRO DUCED ONLY COPIES OF LEDGER ACCOUNT FOR EXPENSES INCURRED BY EACH DEP ARTMENT AND NO EVIDENCE IS FURNISHED TO CONCLUDE THAT SALES, ADVER TISEMENT, MARKETING AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS ARE DEALIN G ONLY IN RESPECT OF DOMESTIC SALES AND TECHNICAL AND CORPORATE DEPAR TMENTS ARE DEALING IN RESPECT OF EXPORT SALES. SIMILARLY, TH E REASON FOR ALLOWING ADJUSTMENT ONLY AT 1.98% AS AGAINST 15% TOWARDS QUA NTITY DISCOUNTS ITA 110/MDS/08 5 IS THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR QUANTITY DISC OUNTS AT 15% IS NOT BASED ON ANY SCIENTIFIC WORKING AND IS ONLY ON AD H OC BASIS. 4. ON APPEAL, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPE ALS) DELETED THE ADDITION OF B.1,34,17,582/- SUGGESTED B Y THE TPO ON THE GROUND THAT THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE MARKETING, SALES, ADVERTISEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS ARE ON LY FOR THE DOMESTIC SALES AND NOT FOR EXPORTS AND EXPENSES INC URRED ARE TOWARDS AGENCY COMMISSION, OCTROI CHARGES, SALES TA X, SALARIES AND OTHER DOMESTIC EXPENSES OF SALESMEN, DOMESTIC TRAVE L ETC. THEREFORE, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HELD THAT ALL THESE EXPENSES ARE RELATED ONLY TO THE DOMESTIC SAL ES AND NOT RELATED TO EXPORTS. THEREFORE, HE ACCEPTED THE PRICE ADJU STMENT AS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AT 34.48%. IN RESPECT OF QUANTITY DISCOUNTS, THE COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EXP ORTED TO ITS ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHER QUANTITY THAN THAT SOLD IN THE DOMESTIC MARKET AND THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE IS J USTIFIED IN CLAIMING 15% ADJUSTMENT TOWARDS QUANTITY DISCOUNT. ITA 110/MDS/08 6 5. THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITS THAT TH E ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN MANUFACTURE AND EXPORT OF TO YS. HE SUBMITS THAT THE TPO HAS ACCEPTED THE CUP METHOD ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE AS APPROPRIATE METHOD IN DETERMINING ARMS LENGTH PR ICE. THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITS THAT RATE OF TO YS FOR DOMESTIC SALES IS MORE THAN THE RATE ADOPTED FOR EXPORTS AN D THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHIFTED EXPENSES TO DOMESTIC SALES AND , THEREFORE, THE PROFIT HAS COME DOWN. HE SUBMITS THAT THE TPO IN ARRIVING AT ARMS LENGTH PRICE HAS ACCEPTED THE ADJUSTMENTS MADE BY T HE ASSESSEE ON THE EXPENSES INCURRED TOWARDS TRANSPORTATION COSTS, EXCISE DUTY, MARKET RETURNS AND CREDIT RISKS. HE SUBMITS THAT I N RESPECT OF THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN SALES, ADVERT ISEMENT, MARKETING AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS THE TPO AL LOWED ADJUSTMENT ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF 4.28% AS AGAINST 3 4.48% ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRODU CED ANY EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THESE EXPENSES ARE INCURRED O NLY FOR DOMESTIC SALES EXCEPT FILING LEDGER COPIES.. THEREFORE, HE SUBMITS THAT THE ADJUSTMENT MADE BY THE TPO AT 4.28% IS IN ORDER. ITA 110/MDS/08 7 6. IN RESPECT OF QUANTITY DISCOUNTS, THE DEPARTMEN TAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED 15 % ADJUSTMENT TOWARDS QUANTITY DISCOUNT WHICH IS ONLY ON AD HOC B ASIS AND IT IS NOT BASED ON ANY SCIENTIFIC WORKING. HE ALSO SUBMITS T HAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO SUGGEST THAT THE ASSESSEE IS IN THE PRACTICE OF GIVING QUANTITY DISCOUNT. THEREFORE, THE TPO WAS F AIR ENOUGH IN ALLOWING QUANTITY DISCOUNT AT 1.98%. 7. THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE MAIN AREA OF DISPUTE IN THE APPEAL IS THE ADJUSTMENTS MADE IN RESPECT OF SALES, MARKETING, ADVERTISEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTM ENTS AND QUANTITY DISCOUNTS. THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE BASED ON INTERNATIONAL QUOTAT IONS PLACES ORDERS ON THE ASSESSEE FOR SUPPLY OF TOYS. THE COUNSEL S UBMITS THAT THE ASSESSEE UNDERTAKES WORK ON CONTRACT BASIS FOR ITS ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE. HE SUBMITS THAT TOOLS AND DESIGNS ARE SUPPLIED BY ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE BASED ON WHICH THE TOYS ARE S UPPLIED. IN RESPECT OF SALES TO ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE HE SUBMIT S THAT THERE IS NO MUCH RISK. THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS T HAT OUT OF TOTAL ITA 110/MDS/08 8 SALE OF TOYS MADE DURING THIS ASST. YEAR, 97% ARE E XPORTS TO ITS ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE AND ONLY 3% ARE DOMESTIC SALE . THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT WHILE ARRIVING AT ARM S LENGTH PRICE THE EXPENSES NOT CONNECTED WITH EXPORTS HAVE TO BE DEDU CTED BY MAKING NECESSARY ADJUSTMENT TO THE PRICES . THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE EXPENSES INCURRED FOR ADVERTISEMEN T, SALES, MARKETING, AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS ARE ALL I NCURRED FOR THE DOMESTIC SALES AND NOT CONNECTED WITH EXPORTS. THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE TPO DID NOT ACCEPT THE AD JUSTMENT AS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF EXPENSES INCURRE D BY SALES, MARKETING, ADVERTISEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTM ENTS FOR DOMESTIC SALES FOR THE ASST. YEAR UNDER APPEAL. 8. REFERRING TO PAGES 14 TO 16 OF THE PAPER BOOK, THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE TPO HAD I N FACT ACCEPTED SIMILAR ADJUSTMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE IM MEDIATELY PRECEEDING ASST. YEAR IE. A.Y. 2003-04 IN HIS ORDER DATED 31.10.2005 WHERE NO ADJUSTMENT WAS MADE BY THE TPO AND ADJUSTM ENTS AS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WERE ACCEPTED BOTH IN RESPECT OF EXPENSES ITA 110/MDS/08 9 INCURRED IN SALES, ADVERTISEMENT, MARKETING AND ADM INISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS AND QUANTITY DISCOUNTS ALLOWED BY THE A SSESSEE TO ITS CUSTOMERS. REFERRING TO PAGE 98 TO 101 OF THE PAP ER BOOK, THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALLOWED QUANTITY DISCOUNTS TO ITS DEALERS AND THEREFORE THE CLAIM MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AT 15% IS REASONABLE SINCE 97% OF ITS SALE S ARE TO ITS ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE. THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESS EE SUBMITS THAT SINCE THERE ARE NO CHANGE IN FACTS FOR THE ASST. YE AR 2004-05 WHICH IS UNDER APPEAL NOW, THE ADJUSTMENTS AS MADE BY THE AS SESSEE HAVE TO BE ACCEPTED. THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITS THAT THE MUMBAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF INTERNE T INDIA (P) LTD. V. ACIT (130 TTJ 301) ALLOWED 20% TOWARDS ADJUSTMENT O N ACCOUNT OF VOLUME FACTOR. 9. IN REPLY, THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMI TS THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TPO FOR THE IMMEDIATELY PRE CEEDING YEAR ACCEPTING THE ADJUSTMENTS AS ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSE E IN RESPECT OF EXPENSES FOR SALES, MARKETING, ADVERTISEMENT AND AD MINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS AND THE ADJUSTMENT TOWARDS QUANTITY DIS COUNTS, IS NOT ITA 110/MDS/08 10 BINDING ON THE TPO TO ACCEPT THE SAME FOR THE SUCCE EDING ASST. YEARS WHEN ARMS LENGTH PRICE IS DETERMINED. FOR THI S PROPOSITION, HE RELIED ON THE DECISION OF I.T.A.T., DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF LI & FUNG (INDIA) P. LTD. V. DCIT [12 ITR (TRIB) 748]. THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PR OVED THAT IT HAD GIVEN ANY DISCOUNTS TO ITS DEALERS SO AS TO ALLOW A DJUSTMENT FOR QUANTITY DISCOUNT. THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE REFERRING TO PAGES 98 TO 101 OF THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE SUBMITS THAT THE EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE ONLY SUGGESTS THAT REIMBURSEMENT OF MARGIN WAS GIVEN TO THE DEALERS B Y WAY OF GIVING LEVERAGE TO SELLER TO SELL AT MRP AND IT IS NOT QUA NTITY DISCOUNT AT ALL. THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE OR ANY SC IENTIFIC WORKING FOR ALLOWING 15% TOWARDS ADJUSTMENT FOR QUANTITY DI SCOUNT, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR SUCH QUANTITY DISCOUNT . 10. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES. PERUSED THE MATERIA LS ON RECORD AND THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. IN RESP ECT OF ADJUSTMENT OF 34.48% MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TOWARDS EXPENSES FOR SALES, MARKETING, ADVERTISEMENT, ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENT S FOR DOMESTIC ITA 110/MDS/08 11 SALES IS CONCERNED, WE FIND THERE IS FORCE IN THE A RGUMENT OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THESE EXPENSES ARE INCURRED TOWARDS D OMESTIC SALES ONLY AND NOTHING TO DO WITH EXPORT SALES. THESE DE PARTMENTS ARE INVOLVED IN TRANSPORTATION OF GOODS, FREIGHT CHARGE S INCURRED IN INDIA FOR SENDING THE GOODS TO DEALERS, C&F COMMISSION IN CURRED IN RESPECT OF DOMESTIC SALES, PACKING AND OCTROI CHARGES MAINL Y CONSISTS OF BOPP TAPES, CARTON BOXES FOR SENDING GOODS TO DEALE RS, OCTROI IN THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA INCURRED FOR EXCLUSIVELY ITS DOMESTIC SALES, TRAVELLING OF SALES MANAGERS EXPENSES, SALARIES OF SALES PERSONNEL, AREA SALES MANAGERS, REGIONAL SALES MANAGERS, SALES OFFICERS ETC., TRAVELLING, TELEPHONE EXPENSES, MARKETING AND ADVER TISEMENT EXPENSES INCURRED FOR ADVERTISEMENT IN TELEVISION, MAGAZINES IN INDIA FOR DOMESTIC SALES. ALL THESE EXPENSES INCURRED B Y THE SALES, MARKETING, ADVERTISEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTM ENTS ARE ONLY IN RESPECT OF DOMESTIC SALES ONLY. WE ALSO SEE THAT T HE EXPORT SALES ARE LOOKED AFTER BY THE TECHNICAL AND CORPORATE DEPARTM ENTS. ITA 110/MDS/08 12 11. WE ALSO FIND FORCE IN THE ARGUMENT OF THE ASS ESSEE THAT THERE IS NO NEED FOR ANY ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSE TO BE INCURRED FOR THE SALES MADE TO ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE ABROAD AS 9 7% OF ITS SALES OF TOYS ARE TO ITS ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE ABROAD. WE A LSO FIND FROM THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)S ORDER THAT T HE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS ALLOCATED CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENS ES TO EXPORTS IN THE COLUMNAR PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND IT IS NOT THE SITUATION THAT COMMON EXPENSES ARE NOT ALLOCATED TO EXPORTS. IT I S ALSO THE FINDING OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) THAT TH E ABOVE EXPENSES WERE CERTIFIED BY COST ACCOUNTANT. ON EXA MINATION OF THESE DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) CONCLUDED THAT THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE THROUGH THESE DEPARTMENTS ARE ONLY TOWARDS DOMESTIC SALES AND, THEREFORE, THE ADJUSTMENTS AS ADOPTED BY THE ASSESS EE TOWARDS THESE EXPENSES HAS TO BE ACCEPTED. THEREFORE, WE AGREE W ITH THE VIEW OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IN THIS AS PECT AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ACCEPT THE ADJUSTMENT OF 3 4.48% ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF EXPENSES INCURRED BY SAL ES, MARKETING, ITA 110/MDS/08 13 ADVERTISEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS IN ARR IVING AT ARMS LENGTH PRICE. 12. IN RESPECT OF QUANTITY DISCOUNT THE COMMISSION ER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSES SEE FOR ADJUSTMENT AT 15% ON THE GROUND THAT THE VOLUME OF QUANTITY EXPORTED TO ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE ARE SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHER THAN THE VOLUME OF SALES IN DOMESTIC MARKET AND THEREFORE, T HE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOUNT OF 15%. THIS APPE ARS TO BE ONLY ON ESTIMATE ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT ANY SCIENT IFIC WORKING AS OBSERVED BY THE TPO. FURTHER, THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORDS TO SUGGEST THAT THE ASSESSEE IS IN THE PRACTICE OF GIVING QUA NTITY DISCOUNTS TO ITS DEALERS OR IT HAS ACTUALLY ALLOWED ANY QUANTITY DIS COUNTS TO ITS DEALERS. THE DECISION OF BOMBAY BENCH OF THE TRIBU NAL IN THE CASE OF INTERNET INDIA (P) LTD, V, ACIT (SUPRA) MAY NOT BE APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEES CASE BECAUSE HERE THE ASSES SEE DID NOT PROVE THAT ANY QUANTITY DISCOUNTS ARE ACTUALLY ALLOWED TO ITS DEALER. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE UP HOLD THE ADJUSTMENTS MADE BY T PO AT 1.98% ITA 110/MDS/08 14 AS AGAINST 15% ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE TOWARDS QUAN TITY DISCOUNTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ARRIVING AT ARMS LENGTH PRICE. 13. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 14. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON TUESDAY, THE 26 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( N.S. SAINI ) (CHALLA N AGENDRA PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED : 26 TH FEBRUARY 2013. JLS. COPY TO:- (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT-(A), (4) C.I.T., (5) D.R. (6) GUARD FILE