Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (11) TMI 1748 - AT - Income TaxTP Adjustment - comparables selection - functinall similarity - HELD THAT:- Bodhtree Consulting Ltd. - Since the Tribunal has examined the profile and datas of Bodhtree Consulting Ltd. and has come to the conclusion that this company cannot be taken as good comparable for computing the ALP, we find no justification in re-examining the issue again. Accordingly, exclusion of Bodhtree Consulting Ltd. from the list of comparables upheld. Exclusion of this company i.e., Exensys Software Solution Ltd. from the list of comparables considering the fact that unusual profits arose out of an extra ordinary event of amalgamation. Syassaris Software P. Ltd. engages itself in products and services as well as software training, it cannot be considered as a comparable of the Appellant. Thirdware Solutions Ltd. be excluded as information furnished by the said company that though the said company is also into product development, there are no software products that the company invoiced during the relevant financial year and the financial results are in respect of services only. Thus, it is clear that there is no sale of software products during the year but the said company might have incurred expenditure towards the development of the software products. Geometric Software Solutions Company Ltd. issue should also go back to the TPO to adjudicate the justification of its exclusion on the point of RPT filter. Tata Elxsi Ltd. cannot be included in the list of comparables as it is functionally different and has incomparable size to that of the assessee. iGate Global Solutions Ltd., Flextronics Software Systems Ltd., L&T Infotech Ltd., Satyam Computer Services Ltd. and Infosys Technologies Ltd., be excluded as their turnover exceeds 10 times of the turnover of the assessee. Four Soft Ltd. - Tribunal in the aforesaid order has applied RPT filter and excluded this company from the list of comparables, but RPT of this company was not mentioned in the order. Therefore, in the absence of complete details, it is not proper to follow the order of Tribunal blindly. We therefore set aside this issue to the file of TPO/AO to examine the justification of its inclusion/exclusion by applying the RPT filter in the light of available datas of this company. VJIL Consulting Ltd. - In the absence of clear details, the TPO rejected this comparable. Now the details of this comparable are available and the CIT(A) has included the same in the list of comparables without confronting the audit report and datas to the TPO. We therefore find it proper to remit the matter to the TPO to reconsider the inclusion of this comparable in the list of comparables in the light of the order of the Tribunal in the case of Qualcomm India Pvt. Ltd. (supra). Accordingly adjudication of this comparable is restored to the TPO. Melstar Information Technology Ltd - We restore the matter to the file of AO/TPO to examine the claim of inclusion of this comparable in the light of annual report and other details. Deduction u/s. 10A in respect of Unit–II custom bonding licenses were obtained only on 29.1.2002. - CIT(A) allowed deduction - HELD THAT:- We have carefully examined the order of CIT(Appeals) on this issue and we find that the CIT(Appeals) has examined this issue in the light of various judicial pronouncements of different Benches of the Tribunal and finally having relied upon the order of Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the AYs 2002-03 to 2004-05, the CIT(Appeals) has held that the company is eligible to claim deduction u/s. 10A in respect of Lara Unit income and allowed the relief. Since the CIT(Appeals) has decided the issue following the order of Tribunal which was later on confirmed by the jurisdictional High Court [2014 (11) TMI 1277 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] we find no infirmity in the order of CIT(Appeals), accordingly we confirm the same.
|