Transfer Pricing Case Studies – Detailed Analysis of 5 Case Studies. Hi Friends here we are providing All Case Studies on Transfer Pricing. You can find all best case studies in this article for Transfer Pricing. Recently we are providing What’s the Difference Between FDI and FII? and Stock arket…An overview to know about at a Glance. You can also download CA Final Direct Tax and Indirect Tax Case Studies in my Another Articles. Now you can scroll down below and check complete details regarding “Transfer Pricing Case Studies”
Transfer Pricing Case Studies
Case Study on Transfer Pricing
- XYZ Inc., a fortune 500 Company is in the business of manufacturing of automobiles
- XYZ India is a 100 % subsidiary and provides CAD designing services.
- XYZ India is a captive service provider and is compensated on a C + 10 % mark up.
- XYZ India has applied the TNNM as the Most Appropriate Method using comparables operating in ITeS industry. –
- PLI applied – Operating Margin / Operating Cost
Position of the TPO
- Rejection of Loss Making Companies
- Rejection of Companies having only domestic transactions
- Rejection of Multiple year data
- Own set of Comparables provided without any search process (cherry picking)
- Proposed mark up of 30% -40%
Position of the Tax Payer
- Loss cannot be the sole criteria for rejection (entrepreneurial risk)
- TNNM requires functional comparability
- Financial results of comparables exhibit high degree of variation
- Integrated Service Provider to be excluded
- Companies having intangibles to be excluded ( unique software, brand name etc)
- Adjustment for :
- Working Capital
- Risk ( captive service provider Vs. entrepreneur)
- Captive Service Provider (BPO/ITeS)
–Losses not acceptable
–Proposed cost plus markups range from 25% to 40%
–“One size fits all” approach
–Comparables proposed inappropriate (no consideration for intangibles, differences in business models, etc.)
–Justifies markup saying “even after paying high markups, cost savings will be substantial”
- Adjustment of risk vis-à-vis third party comparables disallowed
- Working capital adjustments of 2% allowed in some cases
Case Study 1 on Transfer Pricing :-
Applicability of SDT to transactions between non‐residents
- Mr. X is director of FCO which has a PE in India
- Mr. X was deputed to work for PE in India from 1 November 2012 during FY 2012‐13.
- For services rendered upto October 2012, Mr. X was paid salary outside India. For services rendered post 1 November 2012, he is paid salary in India.
- PE is liable to tax on net basis in India. Mr. X’s status is non‐resident for FY 2012‐13.
- PE claims salary paid to Mr. post 1 November 2012 as deductible expenditure from its income.
- Whether salary paid to Mr. X is subject to Domestic TP considering that both FCO (and hence its
PE) as also Mr. X are non‐residents?
Case Study 2 – Applicability of TP for royalty paid by Indian and foreign subsidiaries to Indian parent
- Hold Co is an Indian company.
- Sub 1 is a foreign subsidiary. Sub 2 and Sub 3 are Indian subsidiaries.
- Hold Co. owns valuable brand ‘XYZ’ which is self generated for Hold Co.
- Hold Co is not eligible for any profit linked tax holiday
- The subsidiaries are engaged in manufacturing and distribution of diverse products.
- The subsidiaries sell their products under brand name of ‘XYZ’.
- The subsidiaries pay royalty to Hold Co. for use of brand name.
- Sub 1 has no presence in India and is not liable to tax in India.
- Sub 2 pays royalty of Rs.4 Cr to Hold Co. Sub 3 pays royalty of Rs.7 Cr to Hold Co. Both Sub 2 and
Sub 3 are not entitled to any profit linked tax holiday.
- Whether Hold Co. is liable for Domestic TP for royalty received from subsidiaries?
- Whether subsidiaries are liable to Domestic TP?
CASE STUDY 2 on Transfer Pricing
- A Ltd. is an Indian company and not eligible for any tax‐holiday
- B Ltd. is a foreign company located in U.S.A. and 100% subsidiary of A Ltd.
- C Ltd. is an Indian company, 100% subsidiary of A Ltd., and not eligible for tax‐holiday
- D Ltd. and E Ltd. are Indian companies, 100% subsidiaries of A Ltd. and eligible for deduction u/s.10AA
- A Ltd. granted interest free loans to B Ltd., C Ltd. and D Ltd.
- A Ltd. granted loan to E Ltd. at interest rate of 18% p.a.
What is the effect of Domestic TP in the hands of A Ltd., B Ltd., C Ltd., D Ltd., and E Ltd.? B Ltd. A Ltd. C Ltd. D Ltd. E Ltd.
CASE STUDY 4 on Transfer Pricing
CASE STUDY 5 on Transfer Pricing
- A Ltd. is an Indian company engaged in software development and eligible for section 10AA benefit
- B Ltd. is a wholly owned subsidiary of A Ltd. situated in China and provides R & D services to A Ltd.
- B Ltd. charges cost plus 20% mark‐up for providing R & D services to A Ltd.
- With effect from 01.10.2012, shareholding of A Ltd. in B Ltd. was reduced to 25%
- A Ltd. has earned OP/OC of 40% from 01.04.2012 to 30.09.2012 as well as from 01.10.2012 to 31.03.2013. Arm’s length OP/OC is 17%
- During F.Y. 2012‐13, whether A Ltd. will be subject to International TP or Domestic TP or both?
- In Domestic TP, whether transactions will be covered u/s. 40A(2) or 80‐IA(10) or both?
- Whether any upward adjustment can be made for A Ltd. by the AO under Domestic TP
- Provisions even though there is mere change in the shareholding without any change in the pricing mechanism of transactions with related party?
- CA Final IDT Latest Notes Amendment
- CA Final Law Latest Notes, Amendments
- CA Final SFM Latest Notes, Amendments
- CA Final DT Latest Notes, Amendments
- CA Final Result
- CA IPCC Result
- CA CPT Result
- Thin Capitalization Rules in International Taxation – Transfer Pricing Series