Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2021 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (2) TMI 138 - HC - Income TaxTP Adjustment - Comparable selection - Whether tribunal is right in law in excluding certain comparable-companies on the ground of functional dissimilarity even when the comparable-companies satisfied all the qualitative and quantitative tests applied by Transfer Pricing Officer? - HELD THAT:- We find sufficient force in the submission made by the assessee that the first substantial question of law framed is vague inasmuch as particulars of the companies whose exclusion was being challenged has not been mentioned in the aforesaid substantial question of law. From perusal of the order passed by the tribunal, it is evident that the tribunal has placed reliance on in the case of Thirdware Solutions Ltd., which pertain to the same Assessment Year and thus, the tribunal has followed its own order in the same Assessment Year. From perusal of the order passed by the tribunal and in particular from para 11.1 to 11.8, it is evident that the tribunal has recorded the findings for exclusion of the companies pertaining to ITE services segment by assigning cogent reasons. Similarly, in paragraphs 12 and 13 of the order passed by the tribunal, the tribunal has excluded the companies of SWD services segment by assigning valid and cogent reasons. The revenue has not assailed the reasons assigned by the tribunal to be perverse no any material has been brought on record to indicate the perversity recorded by the tribunal. The aforesaid question is a question of fact and this court cannot interfere with the same in the absence of perversity. Therefore, the first substantial question of law is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. Excluding certain comparable companies on the ground of RPT filter - Tribunal did not apply the Related Party Transaction filter and in fact, has rejected the same - Therefore, the second and third substantial questions of law in fact, do not arise for consideration in the fact situation of the case. Therefore, it is not necessary for us to answer the same.
|