Section 92 of the Finance Act 2001: Transfer Pricing in India

Section 92 of India’s Finance Act 2001 introduced comprehensive transfer pricing regulations, significantly impacting multinational corporations (MNCs) and domestic businesses engaged in international transactions with associated enterprises. The primary objective was to curb tax evasion arising from the manipulation of prices in cross-border transactions between related parties.

Prior to the introduction of Section 92, the Indian tax authorities relied on general anti-avoidance provisions, which proved inadequate in addressing the complexities of transfer pricing. Section 92 aimed to bring India’s tax regime in line with international best practices, particularly those outlined by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Transfer Pricing Guidelines.

The core of Section 92 mandates that any income arising from an international transaction between associated enterprises should be computed having regard to the arm’s length price. This means that the price charged in the transaction should be equivalent to what would have been charged in a similar transaction between independent parties under comparable circumstances. This “arm’s length principle” is the cornerstone of transfer pricing regulations worldwide.

The Finance Act 2001 also introduced several key provisions to support the arm’s length principle. These include:

• Definition of International Transaction: It clearly defined “international transaction” as a transaction between two or more associated enterprises, either or both of whom are non-residents, in the nature of purchase, sale, lease, provision of services, lending, borrowing, or any other transaction having a bearing on profits, income, losses or assets of such enterprises.
• Definition of Associated Enterprise: The act provided a detailed definition of “associated enterprise,” establishing various thresholds for determining whether two entities are related. This typically involves direct or indirect control through shareholding, management, or other factors.
• Methods for Determining Arm’s Length Price: Section 92C specified several methods for determining the arm’s length price. These included the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method, Resale Price Method (RPM), Cost Plus Method (CPM), Profit Split Method (PSM), and Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM). The most appropriate method is chosen based on the specific facts and circumstances of the transaction.
• Documentation Requirements: Section 92D mandated the maintenance of specific documentation to support the arm’s length nature of international transactions. This documentation helps the tax authorities review and assess the transfer pricing policies adopted by taxpayers.
• Penalty Provisions: The Act introduced penalty provisions for non-compliance with the transfer pricing regulations, including failure to maintain adequate documentation, failure to report international transactions, and underreporting of income due to transfer pricing manipulation.

While Section 92 provided a robust framework, subsequent amendments to the Income Tax Act, along with court rulings, have further refined and clarified various aspects of transfer pricing regulations in India. For example, the introduction of Advance Pricing Agreements (APAs) has allowed taxpayers to proactively agree with the tax authorities on the arm’s length price for future transactions, providing certainty and reducing the risk of disputes. The introduction of Country-by-Country reporting (CbC reporting) has also been significant.

In conclusion, Section 92 of the Finance Act 2001 laid the foundation for a comprehensive transfer pricing regime in India. It addressed the need for a clear and enforceable framework to prevent tax avoidance and ensure that cross-border transactions between related parties are conducted at arm’s length. The subsequent developments demonstrate the ongoing evolution and refinement of transfer pricing regulations in India to align with international best practices and address emerging challenges.

1280×720 secondary adjustment transfer pricing section ce sorting tax from sortingtax.com

1200×630 provisions sec finance act force cbic from statutoryboost.blogspot.com