9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 983X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation) industry. The assessee generates whole of its business from its parent company, namely, Atrenta, USA. The assessee develops software in accordance with the requirements of its parent company and gets compensation on cost plus 10% mark-up. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, the assessee entered into certain international transactions with its foreign Associated Enterprise (AE). Such transactions have been enumerated on page 2 of the order passed by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO). The assessee adopted Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) as most appropriate method. Three cases were chosen by the assessee as comparable. The TPO rejected such comparable cases with reasons and initially cho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ital of Infosys Ltd. is Rs.17,809/- crore as against the assessee's at Rs.18.80 crore. (d) Infosys Ltd. is a full fledged risk taking company as against the assessee being a captive unit assuming no substantial risk. (e) Infosys is an ITES global technology service provider which designs and delivers IT enabled business solutions as against the assessee developing software in the field of EDA only. (f) Infosys Ltd. has a much wider diversified customer base as against the assessee having only one parent company as its customer. (g) The number of employees on the payroll of Infosys Ltd. stood at 1,04, 850 as against only 202 employed by the assessee. 4.2. In order to strengthen its case for the exclusion of Infosys Ltd., the ld. AR reli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h we hold in principle that the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Agnity Ltd. (supra) appears to be prima facie applicable, we equally appreciate the contention of the ld. DR that the relevant factors need to be evaluated at the TPO's end. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order on this issue and remit the matter to the file of the TPO for deciding this issue afresh as per the mandate of the aforesaid view of the Hon'ble High Court. Needless to say, the assessee will be given full opportunity to put forth its case and lead any fresh evidence or rely on other decisions in support of its claim. 5. The assessee has objected to the inclusion of the case of Bodhtree Consulting Ltd. by the TPO in the list of comparables. It was sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oceedings, the TPO will examine the assessee's contention of such company being also engaged in ITES and non-availability of segmental date qua the software sector. The TPO will decide this issue after entertaining the objections from the A.O. in this regard.
6. Since we have restored the main issue as regards the inclusion of the above referred two comparable cases to the file of TPO and there are certain other issues also raised by the ld. AR in this appeal which were not properly addressed by the authorities below, we direct the consideration of such issues also afresh after due opportunity to the assessee.
7. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 17/01/2014. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
