TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 1197X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... comparables does not call for interference. As far as the exclusion of ESL ITAT itself has noted in its impugned order, that the function profile of the two companies were different. While the Assessee is catering to the capital and financial services markets, ESL works in the area of sales, marketing and supporting financial services. The financial profile of the two KPOs could not be said to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on that the Assessee is a Knowledge Processing Outsourcing ( KPO‟) entity, and therefore, on the face of it the exclusion of Infosys BPO from the list of comparables does not call for interference. 4. As far as the exclusion of ESL is concerned, the ITAT appears to have relied upon para 31 of the decision of this Court in Rampgreen Solutions Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2015) 37 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the service rendered would be dissimilar. Further, both service providers cannot be considered to be functionally similar. Their business environment would be entirely different, the demand and supply for the services would be different, the assets and capital employed would differ, the competence required to operate the two services would be different. Each of the aforesaid factors would have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... POs could not be said to be similar from the point of view of the type of businesses they were catering to. 7. This now virtually the third appeal. What the Court has to examine is whether the view taken by the ITAT is a plausible one and whether the impugned order gives rise to any substantial question of law. The Court is not persuaded to hold that the view taken by the ITAT is not a plausibl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
