TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1545X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fully following this judgment, this issue is decided in favour of the assessee Exclusion of various comparables - HELD THAT:- Assessee company undertakes Software Development services under a Research Development Agreement with its parent company thus companies thus companies functionally dissimilar with that of assessee need to be deselected from final list. Deduction u/s 80G in respect of contribution made towards Calamity Relief Fund of Karnataka - HELD THAT:- The bench pointed out that there is no discussion on this aspect in the draft assessment order, order of DRP and in Final assessment order and therefore, it is not clear as to whether any such deduction was claimed or not. The bench observed that if such deduction is cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... All the appeals and cross objection are against the order of the ITO, Ward -2(1)(1), Bengaluru, passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144C(13) of the Act, dt.29.01.2015, in pursuance to the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel, for the A. Y. 2010-11. IT(TP)A.256/Bang/2015 By the Revenue : 2. First we take up the appeal of the revenue. Grounds raised are as under :- The ld. DR of revenue submitted that Grounds 1, 7 8 are general and no separate adjudication is called for in respect of these grounds. Regarding remaining grounds, he supported the draft assessment order and he also filed written submissions which mainly say that in T. P. analysis, the comparability cannot be decided on the bas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvolved is about reduction of the expenses incurred in foreign currency from Total turnover for the purpose of computing the deduction to be allowed u/s 10A because such expenses were reduced by the AO from Export Turnover. As per the judgment of Hon ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of Tata Elxsi Ltd. (Supra), it was held that total turnover is sum total of Domestic Turnover and export Turnover and therefore, if any amount is reduced from Export Turnover than Total turnover also goes down by the same amount automatically. Respectfully following this judgment, this issue is decided in favour of the assessee and accordingly, Grounds 2 3 are rejected. 4. Regarding remaining grounds i.e. grounds 4 to 6 in respect of exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ., 4) Persistent Systems Solutions Ltd., 5) Sasken Communications Tech Ltd. And 6) Persistent Systems Ltd. Because it was held by the tribunal in this case that these are not good comparables for the reasons given by the tribunal in this order and no difference in facts could be pointed out by the learned DR of the revenue. Accordingly, Ground No. 4 5 are rejected and Ground No. 6 is partly allowed. 5. In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed. CO No.71/Bang/2017 By the assessee : 6. Regarding the C. O. of the assessee, learned AR of the assessee submitted that the C. O. is not pressed and accordingly, the C. O. is dismissed as not pressed. 7. In the result, the C. O. of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... O (Supra) and in particular, our attention was drawn to Para 13 14 of this tribunal order. He pointed out that as per this tribunal order, the tribunal has noted the finding of DRP Hyderabad in the case of Sumtotal Systems India Pvt. Ltd.as per which, the DRP held in that case that L T Infotech Ltd. should be excluded mainly in view of huge turnover and huge brand value. He submitted that as per this tribunal order, this is not a good comparable. Learned DR of the revenue supported the DRP order in the present case. 11. We have considered the rival submissions. We have already seen while deciding the appeal of the revenue that this tribunal order is applicable in the present case. Hence, respectfully following this tribunal or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssue u/s 154 as per law. 14. Regarding Ground No. 23 i.e. in respect of interest u/s 234D of ₹ 158,674/-, learned AR of the assessee submitted that in the present case, refund was not granted but adjusted against old demand and therefore, section 234D is not applicable. Learned DR of the revenue supported the assessment order. 15. We have considered the rival submissions. As per section 234D, where any refund is granted to the assessee under section 143 (1) and no refund is due on regular assessment or refund so granted u/s 143 91) exceeds the refund as per regular assessment, the assessee is liable for interest u/s 234D. In our considered opinion, for applicability of section 234D, issue of refund voucher is not a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
