Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2019 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (1) TMI 1580 - HC - Income TaxDisallowance u/s 14A - addition u/s 35D already been made - double addition - HELD THAT:- Once an allowance claimed under Section 35D of the Act has been disallowed, then the same is added to the income of the Assessee. Thus, there can be no occasion to disallow the same amount under Section 14A of the Act and add it to the income of the Assessee. Allowing the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act as claimed by the Revenue, would amount to double disallowance as correctly held by the Tribunal. Disallowance of deduction u/s. 10A - ITAT deleted addition on account of disallowances made u/s. 40(a)(ia) and 43B - HELD THAT:- It is an agreed position between the parties that the issue raised herein stands concluded in favour of the Assessee and against Revenue by the decision of this Court in CIT v/s. Gem Plus Jewellery India Pvt. Ltd. [2010 (6) TMI 65 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] TP adjustment - computation of income from international transactions - comparable selection - HELD THAT:- VJIL Consulting Ltd., (VJIL) - The view taken by the Tribunal to include M/s. VJIL as a comparable on the ground that it is not a persistent loss making company, is not shown to be perverse. Thus, no interference is warranted. Thus, the proposed question is not entertained. M/s. FCS Software Solutions Ltd. - Tribunal on examination of facts found that the comparable M/s. FCS Software Solutions Ltd., had income from its software development service (comparable with the activity of the Respondent) to the extent of 99.99% of the total revenue. Thus, on the above facts, the Tribunal came to a finding of fact that M/s. FCS Software Company is a comparable to the Respondent for the purpose of arriving at the ALP on application of the TNM Method of the Respondent's transactions with its AE' - this finding of fact by the Tribunal does not give rise to any substantial question of law M/s. Infosys Technologies Ltd., cannot be held as a comparable. This on application on functions, assets and risks test. It being a giant company has larger profits and, therefore, is not a comparable with a company which is smaller in size. M/s. Transworld India Ltd. - revenue derived from exports of software was just 2.21% of its total revenue while Respondent derived 100% of its revenue for export of software. Thus, the filter which was adopted by the TPO of excluding companies having less then 25% of its earnings from export was adopted by the Tribunal. This resulted in M/s. Transworld India Ltd., being excluded from the list of comparables. KALS Information Solutions Ltd., (KALS) and M/s. Helios & Matherson Information Technology Ltd., (M/s. Helios & Matherson) - As relying on PTC SOFTWARE (I) PVT. LTD. [2016 (9) TMI 1282 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] it is not functionally similar to the Respondent. IRCA Online Ltd. - was engaged in a functionally different business from that of the RespondentAssessee company. This inasmuch as the ICRA Online Ltd., was engaged in the development of various products for mutual funds houses such as MFI Explorer. RespondentAssessee provided business support services to its AE's. Thus, concluding that M/s. ICRA Online Ltd., has to be excluded from the list of comparables.
|