"We're too small for transfer pricing rules": What India's Income-tax Act actually requires

The moment a foreign parent sets up an Indian subsidiary and the two start transacting — a management fee, a software licence, a single intercompany invoice — India's transfer pricing (TP) regime switches on. Founders routinely assume TP is a big-company problem and discover, usually during their first assessment, that there is no turnover threshold below which the rules stop applying. The exposure is not the tax on the transaction; it is the penalty for not having documented it.

What the regulation actually says

Transfer pricing in India lives in the Income-tax Act, 1961 — sections 92 to 92F — not in FEMA. This is the first distinction foreign investors get wrong: FEMA (the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999) governs whether money can come in and how it is reported (through forms like FC-GPR for share issues and FC-TRS for share transfers), while the Income-tax Act governs whether the price of your cross-border dealings is at arm's length. Two separate regulators, two separate filings, two separate penalty regimes. Clearing your FC-GPR with the RBI does nothing for your TP obligation.

Section 92 requires that any "international transaction" between "associated enterprises" be computed having regard to the arm's length price (ALP) — the price that would have been charged between unrelated parties. An associated enterprise (section 92A) is broadly any entity that participates in the management, control, or capital of another. A foreign parent holding 26% or more of your Indian company's shares, or advancing a loan of 51% or more of book value of assets, or appointing more than half the board — any of these makes the two entities associated. Most foreign subsidiaries clear this bar on day one.

An international transaction (section 92B) is deliberately wide: sale or purchase of goods, provision of services, lending or borrowing, use of intangibles, cost-sharing, or any transaction having a bearing on profits, income, losses, or assets. A management fee from the parent, a royalty for using the group's brand, an intercompany loan, or even reimbursement of shared costs all qualify.

Two documentation duties follow:

• Section 92D read with Rule 10D — the taxpayer must maintain prescribed TP documentation (the "TP study"): a functional analysis (functions performed, assets used, risks assumed — the FAR analysis), an economic analysis selecting the most appropriate method, and a benchmarking study comparing your pricing against independent comparables. This is required where the aggregate value of international transactions exceeds INR 1 crore in the year. Below that value the full Rule 10D file is not mandatory, but the arm's length standard and the accountant's certificate below still apply.
• Section 92E — every person entering into an international transaction must obtain and file an accountant's report in Form 3CEB, certified by a practising Chartered Accountant, by the due date (typically 31 October following the financial year). Critically, Form 3CEB has no monetary threshold. One international transaction of any size triggers it.

The methods for testing ALP are prescribed in section 92C and Rule 10B: Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP), Resale Price, Cost Plus, Profit Split, Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM), and an "other method." TNMM is the workhorse for service subsidiaries; CUP is preferred for loans and royalties where a market rate exists. Where the arm's length price yields a range, the Act applies an arm's length range (35th to 65th percentile of comparables under Rule 10CA) rather than a single figure — if your price falls inside that band, no adjustment is made.

The three transactions that draw the most scrutiny

Foreign subsidiaries almost always trip on one of three recurring dealings, and each has a distinct benchmarking logic:

• Management or group service fees charged by the parent. The TPO will test both that the service was actually rendered (the "benefit test") and that the mark-up is arm's length. A cost-plus arrangement — pooled parent costs plus a modest mark-up, typically benchmarked under TNMM — is the defensible norm. A round-sum monthly fee with no cost basis is the classic disallowance.
• Royalties and licence fees for the group's brand, technology, or software. These are usually tested with CUP against comparable third-party licensing rates, and the deduction must also survive withholding-tax and FEMA royalty-route rules. Over-claimed royalties are a favourite adjustment because they double as profit-shifting.
• Intercompany loans and guarantees from the parent. The interest rate must be benchmarked to a market rate for a comparable borrower and currency — pricing a rupee loan off a near-zero foreign base rate invites an upward adjustment. Corporate guarantees issued by the parent can themselves be an international transaction requiring a guarantee fee.

Ways to reduce uncertainty upfront

India offers two mechanisms to lock in certainty rather than argue after the fact. Safe Harbour Rules (Rule 10TA–10TG) let eligible taxpayers — notably captive IT and IT-enabled service providers, and certain intra-group loans and guarantees — accept a pre-notified margin that the department will not challenge, in exchange for filing Form 3CEFA. Advance Pricing Agreements (sections 92CC–92CD) allow a company to agree a pricing methodology with the CBDT for up to five future years, with a rollback for four prior years. Both are worth weighing before a group commits to a high-value, recurring arrangement.

Practical implications — what happens if you get this wrong

The penalties are structural, not nominal:

• No Form 3CEB / late filing (section 271BA): a flat penalty of INR 1,00,000, irrespective of transaction size. This is the trap for small subsidiaries — a company with a single INR 5 lakh management fee still owes INR 1 lakh if it skips the certificate.
• Failure to maintain or furnish documentation (section 271AA): 2% of the value of each international transaction not documented or not reported. On a INR 3 crore group services arrangement, that is INR 6 lakh per year — and it applies even if your pricing was actually correct.
• Transfer pricing adjustment (section 270A): if the assessing officer or Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) determines your price was not at arm's length, the difference is added to taxable income and taxed, plus penalty for under-reporting (50%) or misreporting (200%) of the tax on the adjustment.

There is a second-order consequence foreign groups underestimate. A TP adjustment that increases the Indian entity's income is often not deductible in the parent's home jurisdiction, producing genuine double taxation. And a poorly documented royalty or management fee can be recharacterised, disturbing the very repatriation route the group relied on to get profits out of India.

There is also a cash-flow sting most founders never see coming: the secondary adjustment under section 92CE. Where a primary TP adjustment exceeds INR 1 crore and the extra profit is not actually repatriated to India within the prescribed period, the shortfall is deemed an advance to the associated enterprise and imputed interest is charged on it year after year until the money is brought home. A one-time pricing dispute can therefore become a recurring annual tax cost — one more reason to price correctly at the outset rather than defend it later.

Step-by-step: what to do

• Map your associated enterprises early. As soon as the subsidiary is incorporated and the parent holds 26%+ (or funds it via loan/guarantee), treat every parent–subsidiary dealing as an international transaction. Keep a running ledger of these transactions from month one — reconstructing them at year-end is where errors creep in.
• Sign intercompany agreements before the transaction, not after. A management services agreement, licence agreement, or loan agreement dated before the first invoice is the single most persuasive document in an assessment. Backdated paperwork is the fastest way to lose credibility with a TPO.
• Commission the benchmarking study during the year, not at filing. If aggregate international transactions will cross INR 1 crore, engage a TP consultant to run the FAR analysis and comparables search (Indian databases like Prowess or Capitaline) well before October, so pricing can still be corrected if it falls outside the arm's length range.
• File Form 3CEB by 31 October. Have your CA certify the report even if you are below INR 1 crore — the certificate has no threshold. Missing it costs a flat INR 1 lakh regardless of how small your dealings were.
• Keep the Rule 10D file for eight years. Documentation must be retained for eight years from the end of the relevant assessment year and produced within 30 days of an officer's notice (extendable by 30 days). Have it assembled, not merely promised.
• Reconcile with your FEMA filings. Ensure the valuation used for share issuance (FC-GPR) and the pricing in your TP study tell a consistent story. Inconsistent numbers across the RBI and income-tax records invite scrutiny from both.

Planning India entry? Start with a free structure review at makeitlegit.in

---

See Also

• "Just Invoice the Indian Subsidiary a Management Fee": What Transfer Pricing Actually Requires
• Repatriating Profits From India: What FEMA Actually Requires on Dividends, Royalties, and Technical Fees
• "My Indian company is Indian, so it can invest freely": What FEMA actually requires for downstream investment

Need help with this?

Our team handles the paperwork. You focus on your business.