Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2013 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (12) TMI 136 - AT - Income TaxThe TPO has taken wrong segment of comparable company (Crisil Ltd) and in fact the correct segment should have been "research and information services - The TPO in his show cause notice has also taken this particular segment information which disclosed the operating margin at 9.20% - The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly appreciated the information and has held that the TPO has taken a wrong segment for the purpose of comparing the margins and if the correct segment is taken into consideration, then its operating margin can be considered as comparable - The segmental information of Crisil Ltd. has rightly been included in the set of comparables for the purpose of comparability analysis by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) - As per the proviso to section 92C(2) - Such a benefit cannot be given in view of the retrospective amendment by insertion of sub -section 2A in section 92C - In any case, +/-5% is not a standard deduction which is to be given on the arithmetic mean - When the variation between the arm's length price so determined and the price at which internal transaction has actually been undertaken does not exceeds 5%, than only the benefit of tolerance range of +/-5% is to be given – The CIT(A) was incorrect on this view – Partly allowed in favour of Revenue - Decided in favour of assessee. Leased line charges, V-sat charges – Held that:- Following Kotak Securities Ltd. v/s ADIT, [2009] 25 SOT 440 [2008 (8) TMI 592 - ITAT MUMBAI] - V-SAT charges and transaction charges cannot be held to be rendering of technical services and, accordingly, cannot be considered to be covered under section 194J - The TDS is not required on the payment of V-SAT charges and lease line charges – Decided against Revenue. Interest paid to SEBI – Held that:- Following ACIT v/s Bulls and Bears Portfolios Ltd. [2011 (1) TMI 1056 - ITAT DELHI] 48 SOT 0527 - The interest paid to the SEBI for registration fees is a fee which is allowable as deduction in terms of the provisions of section 43B and would be allowable when such an interest is paid as per the SEBI (Interest Liability Scheme) 2004 – Decided against Revenue. Penalty to stock exchange – Held that:- Following assessee's own case for the assessment year 2000-01 - The payments are in the nature of processing fees for bad/short delivery, wrong claim for the corporate benefit, late reporting delayed settlement of IT trades, margin shortage charges etc - The charges are computed based on the penalty points calculated based on default and find their mention in the statement issued by NSCCL as processing charges, the charges so levied as penalty is found to be compensatory in nature - Such penalty payment has been held to be compensatory in nature – The decision of CIT(A) is justified and confirmed – Decided against Revenue. Securities transaction tax – Held that:- The appellant has deducted higher amount of STT than it was required to deduct from its FII client - The excess amount so retained by the appellant has been treated by the appellant as his income in the subsequent i.e. A.Y. 08-09. Such treatment of excess deduction in the A.Y. 08-09, clearly gives the nature of such deductions as income - Such excess deduction done by the appellant cannot be considered to be as per the prescribed charging of SIT and as such if the amount is not refunded back to the clients from whom such deduction is made, then the same should be offered to tax in the year when such excess deduction has taken place - STT payable for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07 have been offered for tax for the subsequent years – The issue was restored for fresh decision.
|