Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (8) TMI 1466 - ITAT CHENNAITP Adjustment - inclusion or exclusion of certain comparable companies while determining the ALP - HELD THAT:- The assessee’s service portfolio enables to provide integrated solution for the management of clinical research data right from inception to completion. The assessee’s world-class team of highly-qualified and experienced scientists, clinicians and multidisciplinary staff are committed to providing quality solutions across a wide range of therapeutic areas. The assessee’s commitment to quality and customer-focused approach, bundled with outstanding expertise distinguishes us from others. The assessee manages the projects based on the clients’ requirements and provide customized solutions. The assessee is having immense talent pool to reliably meet the needs of clients and deliver well within timelines. The services at Jeevan Scientific Technologies Ltd. include Medical Writing, Clinical Data Management, Biostatistics and other services including copy editing, proofreading, formatting, quality assurance, literature search, graphic design and submissions to journals and congresses. AR submitted that as the assessee is an IT company, Jeevan Scientific Technologies Ltd. cannot be considered as comparable to the assessee’s case. There is force in the argument of the ld. AR. There is no dispute that Jeevan Scientific Technologies Ltd. is being ITES, it cannot be compared to the medical prescription company. Accordingly, we are inclined to direct the TPO to exclude Jeevan as comparable to the assessee’s case. The assessee pleaded before us that Microgenetics Systems Ltd. to be considered as comparable to the assessee’s case and should be included as comparable. We considered the argument of the ld. AR. The turnover of Microgenetics Systems Ltd. is very low i.e. ₹ 62.5 crores, whereas the assessee’s turnover is ₹ 600 crores and not proper to compare. On this basis, we are inclined to hold that Microgenetics Systems Ltd. is not comparable to the assessee’s case. This argument is rejected. Disallowance u/s.14A - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, the assessee filed documents before the DRP regarding the computation of disallowance u/s.14A r.w.r 8D However, there is no discussion by the DRP in their order. He observed that there is no segregation of expenses attributable to investment which will exempt income. In our opinion, the documents furnished by the assessee to be looked into and thereafter the DRP has to give direction to the TPO. We direct the assessee to furnish the same documents what is furnished before the DRP on earlier occasion for their consideration and the DRP shall decide the issue in accordance with law after considering the same. Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
|