Sika India Private Limited, Kolkata V. ACIT, Cir-12(2), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 2214/KOL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8200 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 18-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR P K SRIHARI
• Keywords: Transfer pricing; International transaction; Bad and doubtful debts; TDS
• Section: 92C; 143(3); 144C; 13

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH C KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. A.L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 627 & 2214 / KOL / 2017 & ITA NO.2024/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEARS :2012-13 TO 2014-15 SIKA INDIA PVT. LTD. COMMERCIAL COMPLEX-II, 620 DIAMLOND HARBOUR ROAD,KOLKTA-700 034 [ PAN NO.AAECS 1119 F ] V/S . ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 12(2), AAYAKAR BHAWAN, P-7, CHOWRINGHE SQUARE, KOLKTA-700 069 /APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT /BY ASSESSEE SHRI HIMANSHU SINHA, ADVOCATE /BY REVENUE DR. P.K.SRIHARI, CIT-DR /DATE OF HEARING 07-11-2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 22-01-2020 / O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THESE THREE APPEAL(S) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR(S) 2012- 13 TO 2014-15 ARISE AGAINST THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C IRCLE-12(2) KOLKATAS ASSESSMENT(S) DATED 31.01.2017, 18.08.2017 AND 27.0 7.2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR-WISE ) IN FURTHERANCE TO THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PENAL-2 DRP NEW DELHIS DIRECTIONS DATED 30.11.2016, 13.06.2017 AN D 31.05.2018; RESPECTIVELY INVOLVING PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT; RESPECTIVELY. ITA NOS. 627, 2214/K/17 & 2024/K/18 A.YS. 12- 13 TO 14-15 SIKA INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CRI-12(2), KOL. PAGE 2 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES. CASE FILE(S) PERUSED. SINCE THE INSTANT CASES INVOLVED IDENTICAL / INTER-CONNECTED ISSUE(S) , THE SAME ARE DISPOSED OFF BY OUR INSTANT COMMON ADJUDICATION. WE FURTHER PROCEED ASSESSMENT YEAR-WISE FOR THE SAK E OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY. ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 : 3. THE ASSESSEES FIRST AND FOREMOST SUBSTANTIVE GR IEVANCE CHALLENGES CORRECTNESS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION MAKING ARMS LENGTH PRICE ADJUSTMENT OF 69,54,274/- REGARDING ITS INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTION S INVOLVING OF IMPORT OF RAW MATERIALS FROM ITS OVERSEAS ASSOCIATE S ENTERPRISES AE . THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A GROUP-COMPANY OF M/S SIKA GROUP FOUNDED IN ZURICH IN 1910 CARRYING BUSINESS IN THE FIELD OF SPECIALTY CHEMICALS. IT IS A SUBSIDIARY OF M/S SIKA WHICH IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURER AND TRADING OF CONSTRUCTION CHEMICALS AND INDUSTRIA L ADHESIVES. 4. COMING TO THE ADMITTED FACTS, WE FIND THAT THE A SSESSEES IMPORT OF RAW MATERIAL IN INDIA INVOLVED AN AMOUNT OF 202,168,611/- FORMING THE VOLUME OF ITS INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS. IT HAD FURTHER EMPL OYED COST PLUS METHOD FOR BENCHMARKING THE SAID RAW MATERIAL IMPORT TRANSACTI ONS. IT HAD CHOSEN EIGHT COMPARABLE ENTITIES ALONGWITH TESTED PARTY MARGIN O F 20.71% AS AGAINST ARMS LENGTH PRICE IN TRANSFER PRICE STUDY @ 9.99%; RESPE CTIVELY. LEARNED COUNSEL INTER ALIA SUBMITTED THAT THE TRANSFER PRICING OFFICER TPOS ORDER COMBINED THE ASSESSEES TRANSACTIONS OF IMPORT OF RAW MATERI AL AS WELL AS FINISHED GOODS UNDER THE TRANSACTIONAL NET METHOD TNMM . HE REJECTED THE ASSESSEES COST METHOD ACCORDINGLY AND FURTHER EXCLUDED ITS COMPARA BLES TO INCLUDE FRESH ONES DURING REFERENCE PROCEEDINGS. 5. ADVERTING TO THE DRPS ORDER / DIRECTIONS DATED 30.1.2016, LEARNED COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT IT INTEREST UPHOLDS SEPARATE BENCHMARK IMPORT OF RAW MATERIAL AND FINISHED GOODS, AFFIRMING THE TPOS AC TION EMPLOYING TNMM AND ITA NOS. 627, 2214/K/17 & 2024/K/18 A.YS. 12- 13 TO 14-15 SIKA INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CRI-12(2), KOL. PAGE 3 DIRECTED USE OF SEGMENT DATA TO COMPUTE PROFIT LEVE L INDICATOR PLI FOR MANUFACTURING SEGMENTS. LEARNED COUNSELS CASE ACCO RDINGLY IS THAT THE ASSESSEES CORRESPONDING GROUNDS NO.2.-1 TO 2.11 RA ISED IN THE INSTANT APPEAL SEEK TO EXCLUDE SEVEN ADDITIONAL COMPARABLES TAKEN BY THE TPO AND INCLUSION OF TWO MORE COMPARABLES. IT IS FURTHER STATED THAT THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN COMPUTING THE PROPORTIONATE ADJUSTMENTS VA LUE AS PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL PURCHASES INSTEAD OF TOTAL OPERATING COST AS WELL A S TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE MANUFACTURING SEGMENT MARGIN OF SIKA INDIA PVT. LTD. BY INCLUDING PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL DEBTS AN OPERATIVE INCOME IN NATURE. THE ASSESSEES LAST CONTENTION WITH REFERENCE TO INSTANT ISSUE IS THAT THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE FURTHER ERRED IN NOT PROVIDING THE RELEVANT DETAILS OF THE SEARCH PROCESS EMPLOYED FOR SELECTION OF COMPARABLE ENTITIES. 6. OUR ATTENTION IS ALSO INVITED TO THE OTHER RELEV ANT PARTICULARS ENTIRELY THE COMPARABLE ENTITIES M/S VINATI ORGANICS LTD, DIAMIN ES AND CHEMICALS LTD, FINEOTEX CHEMICALS LTD, OMKAR SPECIALITY LTD, CHAMP ION DA-ICHI TECHNOLOGIES LTD, HENKEL TEROSON INDIA LTD, HENKEL CHEMBOND SURFACE TECHNOLOGIES LTD, POLYMER PAPERS LTD. AND INDO AMIN ES LTD. FORMING SUBJECT- MATTER OF THE INSTANT ISSUE. THE DRP HAS ITSELF ACC EPTED THE INDO AMINES LTD IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 AND M/S POLYMER PAPER IS A PSU . LEARNED COUNSEL QUOTED PRODUCT DISSIMILARITIES QUA SOME OF THE ABOVE STATED ENTITIES AS WELL. WE SOUGHT TO KNOW ABOUT THE FINAL OUTCOME OF THE VERY ISSUE IN PRECEDING OR SUCCEEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR(S). WE ARE INFORMED THAT THIS TRIBUNALS CO-ORDINATE BENCH DECISION IN ASSESSEES APPEAL ITSELF ITA NO.911/KOL/2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 HAS RESTORED THE ISSUE OF SELECTION OF COMPARABLE ENTITIES FOR AFRESH ADJUDIC ATION AS PER LAW IN THE VERY SEGMENT BACK TO THE TPO FOR AFRESH ADJUDICATION. WE THEREFORE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO FOLLOW SUIT HEREIN AS WELL FOR THE S AKE OF JUDICIAL CONSISTENCY. 7. MR. SRIHARI AT THIS STAGE SUBMITTED THAT THE TPO S CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS MAY BE DIRECTED TO TAKE NOTE OF THE ASS ESSEES SPECIAL BUSINESS ITA NOS. 627, 2214/K/17 & 2024/K/18 A.YS. 12- 13 TO 14-15 SIKA INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CRI-12(2), KOL. PAGE 4 SEGMENT OF THE PROCESS USED IN CHEMICAL / ADHESIVES INDUSTRIES. WITHOUT EXPRESSING OUR OPINION COMMENTS ON MERITS, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO OBSERVE THAT THE TPOS CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS SH ALL TAKE NOTE OF THE ASSESSEES BUSINESS SEGMENT AS PER LAW FOR THE PURP OSE OF DETERMINING ARMS LENGTH PRICE OF ITS FOREGOING INTERNATIONAL TRANSAC TIONS. THE ASSESSEES INSTANT FIRST GRIEVANCE IS ACCEPTED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE S. 8. NEXT COMES THE ASSESSEES SECOND SUBSTANTIVE GRO UNDS NO.3.1 TO 3.2 SEEKING TO REVERSE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION MA KING ARMS LENGTH PRICE ADJUSTMENT OF 37,542/- TO ITS INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS IN THE N ATURE OF PROVISION FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO THE OVERSEAS AES. LEARNED COUNSELS ONLY PLEA DURING THE COURSE OF HE ARING IS THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT PRESSING FOR THESE GROUNDS NO.3.1 AND 3.2 SINCE THE THIRD LIMB OF THESE GRIEVANCE PLEADING THE IMPUGNED ALP COMPUTED BY THE TPO @ 25.31% COMES VERY WELL WITHIN THE TOLERANCE MARGIN OF 5% AS PER THE CBDTS NOTIFICATION NO.31/2012 DATED 31.01.2012 READ WITH SEC. 92C 2 ND PROVISO. OUR ATTENTION IS INVITED TO THE CORRESPONDING COMPUTATI ON CHART SUGGESTING ACTUAL COST, REVENUE AND PROFITS INVOLVING FIGURE(S) OF 707,011/-, 8,48,413/-AND 1,41,402/- FOLLOWED BY 5% ADDITION THERETO COMING T O 8,90,834/- AND 1,83,823/- UNDER THE LATTER TWO HEAD(S) ONLY; RESPE CTIVELY. 9. LEARNED CIT-DR SUBMITTED THAT THE INSTANT SECOND ISSUE NECESSARILY INVOLVES APPROPRIATE COMPUTATION OF THE ASSESSEES TOLERANCE MARGIN AS PER PROVISION OF THE ACT AND THEREFORE, THE SAME BE RES TORED TO THE TPO FOR FINALIZING THE SAME AS PER LAW. LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE IS FAIR IN NOT DISPUTING THE REVENUES ABOVE STATED PLEA. WE THERE FORE ACCEPT THESE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND LEAVE IT OPEN TO THE TPO T O FINALIZE CONSEQUENTIAL COMPUTATION. 10. THE ASSESSEES THIRD SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE SEEK S TO REVERSE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION MAKING ARMS LENGTH ADJUSTMENT OF 21,31,41,312/- ITA NOS. 627, 2214/K/17 & 2024/K/18 A.YS. 12- 13 TO 14-15 SIKA INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CRI-12(2), KOL. PAGE 5 REGARDING ITS INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS WITH OVERS EA AES IN THE NATURE OF PAYMENTS FOR INTRA GROUP SUPPORT SERVICES. THERE IS NO DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES THAT THE ASSESSEES ENTIRE INTERNATIONAL TR ANSACTIONS VALUE STANDS ADJUSTED AS ARMS LENGTH PRICE IN THE LOWER AUTHORI TIES ORDER BY HOLDING THAT ITS SERVICES RENDERED ARE IN THE NATURE OF STEWARDSHIP SERVICES AND THEREFORE, THEIR ARMS LENGTH PRICE COMES TO NIL AMOUNT ONLY. THE TPO ALSO APPEARS TO HAVE HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO PROVIDE F OR ANY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE IMPUGNED STEWARDSHIP SERVICES. THE DRP HAS U PHELD THE SAME IN ITS IMPUGNED DIRECTIONS. WE NOTICE IN THIS BACKDROP OF FACTS THAT THIS TRIBUNALS CO- ORDINATE BENCH ORDER IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE INVOLVI NG ITA NOS. 575/KOL/2015 & 911/KOL/2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-11 AND 2011-12 HAS SETTLED THE ISSUE THAT THE VERY SERVICES IN CAS E OF THE OVERSEAS AES ARE NOT STEWARDSHIP SERVICES IN NATURE. LEARNED CO-ORDI NATE BENCH HAS ALSO DELETED THE CORRESPONDING ADJUSTMENTS MADE FOR THE IMPUGNED INTRA-GROUP SERVICES AS UNDER:- 9. GROUND NOS. 9 TO 14 ARE AGAINST THE ADJUSTMENT R ELATING TO PAYMENT OF SERVICE CHARGES UNDER THE HEAD HEAD QUARTER SERVICE AGREEME NT AND IT SERVICE AGREEMENT (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS INTRA GROUP SERVICES) . 9.1 THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ASSE SSEES OWN CASE WHILE ADJUDICATING THIS ISSUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 209-10 IN ITA N O.393/KOL/2014, HELD AS FOLLOWS:- 8. LOOKING AT THE NATURE OF THE SERVICES, WE ARE O F THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THESE ARE NOT IN THE NATURE OF STEWARDSHIP SERVICES . THESE ARE SERVICES WHICH ASSISTS SIKA INDIA IN MANAGING THE DAILY AFFAIRS OF ITS BUSINESS. IT HELPS SIKA INDIA IN CONDUCTING ITS BUSINESS OPERATIONS OF MANU FACTURING AND SALE OF CHEMICALS. THE DRP, IN ITS ORDER HAS AGREED THAT TH E SERVICES IN QUESTION HAVE BENEFITED THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. WHEN THIS IS T HE FACTUAL FINDING OF THE DRP, THEN TO COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ALP WA S RIGHTLY DETERMINED AT NIL BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, FOR THE REASON THAT T HE PROPORTION OF THE BENEFIT COULD NOT BE DETERMINED SEPARATELY BETWEEN THE ASSE SSEE AND ITS AE, IS TO OUR MIND, NOT CORRECT. SUCH DIFFICULTIES IN ALLOCAT ION DOES NOT MAKE A SERVICE, STEWARDSHIP SERVICE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT INCURRED ANY EXPENDITURE FOR THESE SERVICES LOCALLY. IT HAS DEPENDED ENTIRELY ON THE AE FOR THESE SERVICES. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR AN ORGANISATION SUCH AS THE ASSESSEE TO CARRY ON BUSINESS WITHOUT THESE SERVICES WHICH INCLUDE IT SE RVICES. THEY ARE ESSENTIAL TO THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, 2007-08 AND 2008-0 9, THE TPO HAS NOT CHARACTERIZED THESE SERVICES AS STEWARDSHIP SERVICE S. HE SOUGHT TO DETERMINE THE ALP OF THESE SERVICES BASED ON PROPOR TIONS OF SHARE OF SERVICE FEE CHARGED TO THE INDIAN ENTITY. IN THIS YEAR, THI S APPROACH IS SOUGHT TO BE CHANGED. LIKE MANY OTHER CASES, THE TPO CAME TO A C ONCLUSION THAT THE ITA NOS. 627, 2214/K/17 & 2024/K/18 A.YS. 12- 13 TO 14-15 SIKA INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CRI-12(2), KOL. PAGE 6 SERVICES IN QUESTION ARE STEWARDSHIP SERVICES, WITH OUT ANY BASIS OR LOGIC. SUCH CLASSIFICATION IS ARBITRARY. 9.2 CONSISTENT WITH THE VIEW TAKEN THEREIN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, ON THE SAME ISSUE, WE UPHOLD THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESS EE AND DELETE THE ADDITION . 11. LEARNED CIT-DR AT THIS STAGE SUBMITTED THAT ISS UE AS TO WHETHER THE IMPUGNED INTRA-GROUP SERVICES ARE TO BE TESTED ACTI ON REGARDING ACTUAL RENDERING OF SERVICES TO BE DECIDED. THE ASSESSEES CASE ON THE OTHER HAND IS SUCH SERVICES ARE VERY MUCH A ROUTINE AFFAIR IN CAS E OF INTRA-GROUP ENTITIES WHEREIN THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN ADOPTI NG NIL VALUE FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING ARMS LENGTH PRICE. WE FIND FORCE IN A SSESSEES PLEA SINCE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE BEEN CONSISTENTLY HOLDING TH E IMPUGNED SERVICES TO BE IN THE NATURE OF STEWARDSHIP ONLY TO THIS EFFECT ST AND DECIDED IN ASSESSEES FAVOUR IN ALL INTERVENING ASSESSMENT YEARS THROUGHO UT. WE THEREFORE ADOPT JUDICIAL CONSISTENCIES AND DECIDE THIS ISSUE AGAINS T THE DEPARTMENT. 12. NEXT COMES THE ASSESSEES ADDITIONAL GROUND CHA LLENGING CORRECTNESS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION DISALLOWING / ADDI NG LEAVE ENCASHMENT AMOUNT OF 26,69,200/-. HON'BLE APEX COURTS LANDMARK JUDGMENT IN DECISION IN NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CORPORATION. LTD. VS. COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME-TAX (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC) CONSIDERED IN ALL CARGO GLOBAL LOGISTICS LTD. VS. DCIT (2012) 137 ITD 26 (MUM) (SB) HOLDS THAT THIS TRIBU NAL CAN VERY WELL ENTERTAIN AN ADDITIONAL GROUND TO DETERMINE CORRECT TAX LIABILITY OF AN ASSESSEE PROVIDED ALL THE RELEVANT FACTS FORM PART OF RECORD S. THE DEPARTMENTS OBJECTIONS AGAINST ADMISSIONS OF ASSESSEES ADDITIO NAL GROUND ARE REJECTED. 13. COMING TO MERITS OF THE LEAVE ENCASHMENT ISSUE, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED LEAVE ENCASHMENT ON PROVISION BASIS AMOUNTING TO 10,71,590/-, 75,47,996/- AND 57,54,869/- FOLLOWED BY THE DISALLOWANCE AS PER FINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER(S) AMOUNTING TO 107159, 75,47,996/- AND 57,54,869/- IN ASSESSMENT YEAR(S) 2010-11 TO 20121- 13; RESPECTIVELY. LEARNED COUNSEL NEXT INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO ASSES SEES CORRESPONDING ITA NOS. 627, 2214/K/17 & 2024/K/18 A.YS. 12- 13 TO 14-15 SIKA INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CRI-12(2), KOL. PAGE 7 PAYMENTS OF 10,71,590/- AND 59,97,626/- IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. WE THEREFORE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE THE INS TANT ISSUE OF DISALLOWANCE OF LEAVE ENCASHMENT BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER F OR AFRESH ADJUDICATION / FACTUAL VERIFICATION AS PER LAW. THE ASSESSEES FIR ST APPEAL ITA NO.627/KOL/2017 IS PARTLY ALLOWED IN ABOVE TERMS. 14. NEXT COME LATTER TWO ASSESSMENT YEAR(S) 2013-14 & 2014-15 INVOLVING ASSESSEES APPEALS ITA NO.2214/KOL/2017 AND ITA NO.2024/KOL/2018 ; RESPECTIVELY. ITS IDENTICAL FIRST GRIEVANCE SEEKS T O REVERSE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION MAKING ARMS LENGTH PRICE ADJUSTMENTS OF 45,902,477/- AND 184,84,469/- ON INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS AMOUNTIN G TO 10,47,03,741/- AND 11,79,72,195/-; RESPECTIVELY PERTAINING TO ROYALTY PAYMENTS. BOTH THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES ARE VERY FAIR IN POINTING OUT THAT THE ASSESSEES STAND ADOPTED THROUGHOUT TO HAVE INCURRED ROYALTY RATE EXPENDITUR E @ 5% AND 8% ON DOMESTIC AND EXPORT SALES IS APPROVED BY THE RESERV E BANK OF INDIA UNDER AUTOMATIC ROOT THIS TRIBUNALS CO-ORDINATE BENCHS DECISION(S) IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 AND 2011-12 (SUPRA) HAS UPHELD THE SAM E. LEARNED CO-ORDINATE BENCH OBSERVED THAT RBIS APPROVED RATES CONSTITUTE A VALID BENCHMARK QUA PAYMENT OF ROYALTY. WE THEREFORE ADOPT THE VERY REA SONING IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL TO DELETE THE IMPUGNED ADJ USTMENTS PERTAINING OF ROYALTIES PAYMENT. 15. THE ASSESSEES SECOND SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE IN BOTH THESE ASSESSMENT YEAR(S) CHALLENGES CORRECTNESS OF THE LOWER AUTHORI TIES ACTION MAKING THE INTRA-GROUP SERVICES ARMS LENGTH PRICE ADJUSTMENTS OF 184,647,104 AND 12,26,32,270/- ON THE GROUND THAT THE SERVICE IN QU ESTION ARE IN THE NATURE OF STEWARDSHIP SERVICES ONLY WHEREIN ARMS LENGTH PRIC E HAS TO BE TAKEN AS NIL ONLY. SUFFICE TO SAY, WE REITERATE THAT WE HAVE ALR EADY DECIDED THE VERY ISSUE IN ITS FAVOUR AND AGAINST THE REVENUE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 (SUPRA). WE ADOPT THE VERY REASONING MUTATIS MUTANDIS TO DELETE THE IMPUGNED STEWARDSHIP SERVICE ADJUSTMENTS. THE ASSESSEE SUCCE EDS IN ITS IDENTICAL ITA NOS. 627, 2214/K/17 & 2024/K/18 A.YS. 12- 13 TO 14-15 SIKA INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CRI-12(2), KOL. PAGE 8 SECOND SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE IN BOTH THESE ASSESSME NT YEAR(S). ITS APPEAL ITA NO.2214/KO/2017 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 RAISING THESE TWO SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES IS ACCEPTED THEREFORE. 16. LASTLY COMES THE THIRD ISSUE OF DISALLOWANCE OF OTHER EXPENSES REGARDING PROVISION TOWARDS RENT, RE-GROUPING OF EX ISTENCE TO RENT ACCOUNT, PRE-REQUISITE EXPENSES FOR ACQUISITION, PROVISION T OWARDS REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE, PROVISION TOWARDS CLEARING AND FORWARD ING EXPENSES AND PROVISION TOWARDS SALES PROMOTION EXPENSES INVOLVIN G RESPECTIVE FIGURE(S) OF 3,95,200/-, 61,78,956/-, 20,11,791/-, 26,47,135/-, 4,35,827/- AND 202,85,459/- AGGREGATING TO 324,54,368/- IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. THE ASSESSEES ONLY CASE DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING I S THAT ALL THESE ISSUES EXCEPT RE-GROUPING OF EXPENSES TO RENT ACCOUNT AND PRE-ACQUISITION EXPENSES INVOLVE DOUBLE DISALLOWANCE AND THE REMAINING TWO I TEMS INCLUDED TDS AMOUNTS ALREADY DEDUCTED. MR. SRIHARI SUBMITTED VER Y FAIRLY THAT THE INSTANT ISSUE PRIMARILY INVOLVES FACTUAL RECONCILIATION AT THE ASSESSING OFFICERS END TO AVOID DOUBLE ADDITIONS. WE THEREFORE RESTORE ASSESS EES INSTANT THIRD ISSUE BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR NECESSARY FACTUAL VERIFICATION / RECONCILIATION. THE SAME IS PARTLY ACCEPTED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE S. ITS MAIN APPEAL ITA NO.2024/KOL/2018 IS PARTLY ALLOWED IN ABOVE TERMS. 17. TO SUM UP, ASSESSEES FIRST AND THIRD APPEALS ITA NO.627/KOL/2017 AND ITA NO.2024/KOL/2018 ARE PARTLY ALLOWED AND SECOND APPEAL ITA NO.2214/KOL/2017 IS ALLOWED. A COPY OF THE INSTANT COMMON ORDER BE PLACED IN THE RESPECTIVE CASE FILES . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 22/ 01/2020 SD/- SD/- ( ) () ) ( A.L.SAINI) (S.S.GODARA) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) KOLKATA, *DKP *- 22 / 01 /20 20 ITA NOS. 627, 2214/K/17 & 2024/K/18 A.YS. 12- 13 TO 14-15 SIKA INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CRI-12(2), KOL. PAGE 9 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /ASSESSEE-SIKA INDIA PVT. LTD., COMMERCIAL COMPLEX- II,620 DIAMOND HARBOUR ROAD, KOLKATA-700 034 2. /REVENUE-ACIT,CIR-12(2), AAYAKAR BHAWAN, P-7, CHOWR INGHEE SQ. KOLKATA-69 3. 5 6 / CONCERNED CIT KOLKATA 4. 6- / CIT (A) KOLKATA 5. 9 ))5, 5, / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. > / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , /TRUE COPY/ 5,