Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

International SOS Services India P. Ltd. Versus DCIT, Circle 11 (1) , New Delhi.

2015 (12) TMI 1548 - ITAT DELHI

Transfer pricing adjustment - comparable selection - Held that:- Comparable companies, performing the same specified support services as that of the assessee company cannot be found, and hence only companies which have broad comparative functional profile of undertaking support services in other fields, have to be taken as comparables. This is for the reason that the assessee is specialized in providing emergency assistance and support services to the members/clients of AE. - Educational Con .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e Appellant : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. For The Respondent : Smt. Mitali Madhusmita, CIT-DR ORDER PER J.SUDHAKAR. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the AO passed u/s 143(3) read with section 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 28/01/2015 for the A.Y. 2009-10. 2. The facts in brief are as under. 2.1. The assessee filed its return of income on 30.09.2009 declaring total income of ₹ 2,00,60,075/-. Since th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to its members/clients of the AE. SOS India allows AEs members/clients to access its services through the SOS Singapore Alarm Centre. This enables clients of AE to access strong medical network of doctors, hospitals, clinics, and service providers across India. The assessee provides emergency assistance and support services to clients who are registered with the AE outside India and who are eligible to avail the services of the Group worldwide including India. During the year under consideratio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

parables whose average margin was 7.10% as against that of assessee s at 7.66%. S.No. COMPANY NAME 1. A2Z Maintenance & Engineering Services Pvt.Ltd. 2. Access India Advisors Ltd. 3. Besant Raj International Ltd. 4. Capital Trust Ltd. 5. Cyber Media Events Ltd. 6. DLF Services Ltd. 7. Educational Consultants (I) Lid. 8. I C R A Management Consulting Services Ltd. 9. IDC (I) Ltd. 10. India Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. 11. In house Production Ltd. 12. Times Innovative Media Ltd. Since .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e as under: S.No. COMPANY NAME 1. Apitco Ltd. 2. Global Procurement Consultant Ltd. 3. KCCA Business Services Pvt. Ltd. 4. Killick Agencies & Marketing Ltd. 5. Oerient Engineering & Commercial Co.Ltd. 2.6. Thus, the Ld.TPO, in all, selected 7 comparable (2 from assessee s set and 5 new comparable), whose average margin was 27.63% as against that of assessee at 7.66%. They are; S.No. COMPANY NAME 1. Access India Advisors Ltd 2. IDC (I) Ltd. 3. Apitco Ltd. 4. Global Procurement Consultant .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mercial Co.Ltd. from the comparables. Regarding the other comparable companies, the order of the Ld.TPO, was approved by the DRP. 4. Further aggrieved the assessee is before us on the following grounds: 1. That the AO erred on facts and in law in completing assessment u/s 144C/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ) at an income of ₹ 3,36,55,607/- as against the income of ₹ 2,00,60,075/- returned by the appellant; 2. That the AO erred on facts and in law in making an adjustmen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.2 That the TPO/DRP erred on facts and in law in considering following companies in the final set of comparable companies allegedly holding them to be functionally comparable to the appellant: i) Apitco Limited ii) Global Procurement Consultant Limited iii) HCCA Business Services Pvt. Ltd. 2.3 That the TPO/DRP erred on facts and in law in not allowing economic adjustment with respect to the operating profit margin of the comparables/appellant on account of the difference in the risk profile of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Mitali Madhusmita, ld. CIT(DR) represented the Revenue. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee provides professional support services to its AE. He explained the business operation of the assessee, and contended that certain comparables selected by the assessee were wrongly excluded by the TPO. He advanced detailed arguments on each of the comparables. We would be dealing with their aguments in our findings. 6. The ld. CIT(DR) opposed the contentions of the assessee. She ar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lected by the assessee as comparable companies for the purpose of bench marking, being: i) Educational Consultant India Limited; ii) ICRA Management & Consulting Services Ltd.; iii) India Tourism Development Corporation Ltd.; b) Whether the DRP was right in upholding the finding of the ld.TPO that the following companies should be taken as comparable companies for the determination for bench marking: i) Apitco Limited; ii) Global Procurement Consultant Limited; iii) HCCA Business Services Pv .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

erence of opinion, we observe that both the assessee as well as the ld.DR have stated that, comparable companies, performing the same specified support services as that of the assessee company cannot be found, and hence only companies which have broad comparative functional profile of undertaking support services in other fields, have to be taken as comparables. This is for the reason that the assessee is specialized in providing emergency assistance and support services to the members/clients o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ity and risk management services to corporations, governments, and individuals. Founded in 1985 as AEA International, the Group focuses specifically on providing medical care and consulting services to employees and employers. It offers assistance in setting up and managing healthcare facilities. It also provides a range of occupational health services. International SOS offers medical and emergency support services to those living and travelling outside their home countries and provides healthc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rs emergency response planning and security evacuation solutions. The clients of SOS Singapore include banks, universities, pharmaceutical companies, and government and non-profit organizations. International SOS Services (India) Private Limited Background SOS India is a wholly owned Indian subsidiary of SOS Singapore. SOS India primarily acts as a support centre to the SOS Singapore location. SOS India provides emergency assistance and support services to members/clients of various Associated e .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ancial year ending March 31, 2009, SOS India has also provided administrative support services to two of its associated enterprises. 10. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, submitted that under the given facts and circumstances, companies providing specialized support services, in different fields, have to be accepted as comparable companies, for the purpose of bench marking, as their functions are broadly comparable with the functions of the assessee cpmpany. 11. We find that Access India Advisor .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

company. Similarly in the case of M/s.IDC (I)Limited is a company providing marketing intelligence, advisory services for the information technology, telecommunication and consumer technology markets. This company has been accepted by both parties as comparable. Hence, companies rendering specialized services, though in functionally different areas, are accepted by both parties as comparable companies. 12. With this background, we now examine each of the comparable companies in dispute. 1. Educ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

operate on losses in furtherance of social obligations of the government. It is also a matter of common knowledge that works are allotted by the Government to P.S.U on a preferential basis or on different considerations. Respectfully following the proposition laid down by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. ThyssenKrupp Industries India Pvt.Ltd(supra), we direct the TPO to exclude this company from the list of comparable companies while computing the ALP. 2. ICRA Management .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed by the Revenue as a comparable. He cited the case of M/s.Access India Advisory Limited.The Ld.DR relied on the orders of the DRP. 12.2 On the issue of functional profile we agree with the submission of the ld.AR. When M/s.Access India Advisors Ltd., having a functional profile of management consultancy, business advisory etc., is agreed as a comparable by the TPO, the question of excluding ICRA Management Consulting Services Limited, which is having identical functional profile as a comparabl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

00,000/- in the form of technical knowhow and whereas ICRA has no intangible assets. 12.5 The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the related party transaction actually does not exceed 14%, and hence the DRP is factually wrong. In any event ld. Counsel could not controvert the findings of the DRP, on the fact of ICRA not being in possession of intangible assets. When one company own intangible assets and when the other company does not own intangible assets, both cannot be compared. Thus .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

omparables for the reasons that, profit motive is not the only relevant consideration in case of Government undertakings. Many Government undertaking operate on losses in furtherance of social obligations of the government. Educational Consultants India was directed to be excluded for the same reason. Respectfully following the proposition laid down by the co-ordinate bench of the ITAT in the case of M/s. ThyssenKrupp Industries India Pvt.Ltd(supra), we direct the TPO to exclude this company fro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tance of the submission are that the areas in which this company provides support services is totally different from the type of support services provided by the assessee. He placed reliance on the decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Rampgreen Solutions Pvt. Limited vs. CIT, ITA No. 102/2015 judgment dated 10/08/2015 for the proposition that functionally dissimilar companies cannot be taken as comparables. He pointed out that decision of the Spl. Bench of the Tribunal in the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tional profile is that of specialized support services, which required high profile skill and timely delivery of quality services, which is comparable with the functional profile of the assessee. 12.8 On a careful consideration of these arguments, we are of the considered opinion that this company should be taken as a comparable for the following reasons: a) This is not a 100% Government owned company as claimed by the assessee. Under the head corporate synergy it is stated that this company is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e same field as that of the assessee company cannot be found, companies rendering support services in other fields have to be taken as comparables. c) We have also perused the decision of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Rampgreen Solutions Pvt. Ltd.(supra). The claim of the ld. Counsel for the assessee is based on the propositions laid down in this case law. If on such an argument, the comparable Global Procurement Consulting Limited is excluded, then all the other comparabl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd. In view of the above discussion we are of the considered opinion that Global Procurement Consulting Limited has rightly be taken as the comparable by the TPO. Hence we dismiss this argument of the assessee. 5. HCCA Business Services Pvt. Ltd. 12.9. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that this company is engaged in the business of providing pay roll processing services and hence is not functionally comparable. The sum and substance of his arguments is that this company renders low end B .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version