Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2020 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (6) TMI 300 - HC - Income TaxTP Adjustment - Comparability - substantial question of law or fact - Tribunal after exhaustive analysis came to the conclusion that Motilal Oswal was not functionally similar to that of the assessee whereas ICRA and IDC were found to be functionally similar - HELD THAT:- Whether two entities are functionally similar or not and consequently whether one should be treated as a comparable of the other is a question of fact. The answer arrived at to such question would be a finding of fact. Unless such answer is vitiated by perversity, no substantial question of law can be said to arise therefrom. In the context of international transactions and the resultant transfer pricing analysis to determine Arm’s Length Price. In the case of Principal Commisioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Softbrands India Pvt. Ltd. [2018 (6) TMI 1327 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] held that it is not open to either the assessee or the Revenue to invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 260-A of the Act merely because the Tribunal comes to reverse or modify the findings given by the Transfer Pricing Officer and / or by the Dispute Resolution Panel leaving out certain comparables or adding certain comparables for determining the Arm’s Length Price in the hands of the assessee. Unless perversity in the finding(s) of the Tribunal is established, an appeal under Section 260-A of the Act should not be entertained as no substantial question of law can be said to arise therefrom. Also in M/s. Eight Roads Investment Pvt. Ltd. [2019 (2) TMI 1806 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] declined to entertain an appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Act raising similar questions of exclusion and inclusion of comparables. No substantial question of law arises from the impugned order of the Tribunal. - Decided against revenue.
|