International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Delhi Tribunal rules on transactional net margin method

Hasnain Shroff, Sanjeev Gupta and Tarini Nijhara in India look at the unreported judgement in the case of IL Jin Electronics (India) Private Limited.

In an interesting judgement, the Delhi bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal provided vital guidance for ascertaining the arm’s-length price of an international transaction under the transactional net margin method (TNMM).

The taxpayer, IL Jin, an Indian company, entered into various international transactions with its associated enterprises (AEs) to carry out its operations, with the bulk of international transactions being that of purchase of raw material.

During the audit proceedings, the transfer pricing officer (TPO) objected to two of the comparables and accordingly, on the basis of average margin earned by the remaining comparables (5.29%) with regard to that earned by the taxpayer,(1.65%), the TPO made a downward adjustment to IL Jin’s international transaction of imports of raw material and held other transactions at arm’s length. In light of the TPO’s order, the assessing officer (AO) made additions to IL Jin’s taxable income which were  upheld subsequently by the commissioner of income-tax (appeal) [CIT(A)].

Aggrieved by the decision, IL Jin filed an appeal with the tribunal against the order. Among various grounds of appeal, the taxpayer averred that while ascertaining the arm’s-length price of the international transaction under TNMM, the total difference arising in operating profit cannot be exclusively attributed to the international transaction. In this regard, IL Jin brought the tribunal’s attention to the fact that for manufacturing printed circuit board, IL Jin consumed 45.51% imported and 54.49% indigenised raw material.

Therefore, the taxpayer contended that the profit margin of 5.29% of sales should be proportionately applied to arrive at the arm’s-length price of the imported raw material. Based on the facts of the case, the tribunal concurred with the taxpayer that only 45.51% of the operating profit arising from the sales can be attributed to the import of raw material and thereby directed the AO to reduce the adjustment proposed by the TPO.

Thus, the ruling provides insight into the mechanism for ascertaining the arm’s-length price of the international transaction under TNMM. In addition, the tribunal has proffered an implicit or tacit acceptance of the fact that a company can earn low-margins due to factors other than international transaction. The observations made by the tribunal once again resonate with the principle which has been upheld in the recent ruling of Global Vantage wherein the Delhi tribunal had espoused the philosophy that while assessing an international transaction, the evaluation needs to be restricted to the international transaction only.

However, the matter of debate will be how to apply the approach adopted in this judgment in more complex situations. For instance, under TNMM, the operating margin garnered by a company is a function of total sales, cost of goods sold and other expenses such that difference in operating profit earned by the tested party as compared to that earned by the comparable companies, can be due to any of these factors. However, due to non-availability of data for application of statistical tools, many times it is not possible to make appropriate adjustments for various differentiating factors, thereby resulting in attribution of the deficit in the operating margin entirely to the international transaction(s). To some extent, this issue dovetails with a broader challenge that is underway concerning the methodology for making ‘appropriate adjustments’ for enhancing comparability.

Hasnain Shroff (, Sanjeev Gupta ( and Tarini Nijhara (

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

ITR’s latest quarterly PDF is going live today, leading on the EU’s BEFIT initiative and wider tax reforms in the bloc.
COVID-19 and an overworked HMRC may have created the ‘perfect storm’ for reduced prosecutions, according to tax professionals.
Participants in the consultation on the UN secretary-general’s report into international tax cooperation are divided – some believe UN-led structures are the way forward, while others want to improve existing ones. Ralph Cunningham reports.
The German government unveils plans to implement pillar two, while EY is reportedly still divided over ‘Project Everest’.
With the M&A market booming, ITR has partnered with correspondents from firms around the globe to provide a guide to the deal structures being employed and tax authorities' responses.
Xing Hu, partner at Hui Ye Law Firm in Shanghai, looks at the implications of the US Uyghur Forced Labor Protection Act for TP comparability analysis of China.
Karl Berlin talks to Josh White about meeting the Fair Tax standard, the changing burden of country-by-country reporting, and how windfall taxes may hit renewable energy.
Sandy Markwick, head of the Tax Director Network (TDN) at Winmark, looks at the challenges of global mobility for tax management.
Taxpayers should look beyond the headline criteria of the simplification regime to ensure that their arrangements meet the arm’s-length standard, say Alejandro Ces and Mark Seddon of the EY New Zealand transfer pricing team.
In a recent webinar hosted by law firms Greenberg Traurig and Clayton Utz, officials at the IRS and ATO outlined their visions for 2023.