TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1094X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appeal is filed by the Revenue purportedly raising substantial questions of law arising from the Order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench A , Bangalore, in ITA No.918/Bang/2011 dated 23.11.2012, relating to the Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. The appeal has been admitted on 13.11.2013 to examine the substantial question of law No.1 as indicated in the memorandum of appeal. However, learned counsel for the Revenue seeks to consider the second and third substantial questions of law framed in the memorandum of appeal. 3. The substantial questions of law framed by the Revenue in the Memorandum of Appeal are as under: 1. Whether the Tribunal was right in imposing the decision of the other benches of the Tribunal in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rding second substantial question of law:- 15. It can thus be seen from the above that the activities of the assessee in the present case and that of Tevapham Pvt. Ltd., are identical, i.e., both the companies carried out analytical research and stability testing services to its AEs. In the case of Tevapham Pvt. Ltd., the TPO had selected Engineering India Ltd., IDC India Ltd., Oil Field Instrumentation, Celestial Labs and Mindtree Ltd., as comparable. The Tribunal examined the comparability of these companies to a company engaged in contract research development and came to the following conclusion:- xxxxx Thus it is clear that Mindtree is engaged in providing diversified set of services under its R D segment for variou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are therefore of the view that Neeman Medical International [Asia] Limited which is otherwise functionally comparable, should be considered for the purpose of comparability. 7. The controversy involved herein is no more res integra in view of the decision of this Court in I.T.A. Nos.536/2015 c/w 537/2015 dated 25.06.2018 [Prl. Commissioner of Income Tax Anr. V/s. M/s. Softbrands India Pvt. Ltd.,], wherein it has been observed that unless the finding of the Tribunal is found ex-facie perverse, the Appeal u/s. 260-A of the Act, is not maintainable. The relevant portion of the Judgment is quoted below for ready reference: Conclusion: 55. A substantial quantum of international trade and transactions depends upon the fai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... may be cases where the Tribunal giving its own reasons and findings has found certain comparables to be good comparables to arrive at an Arm s Length Price in the case of the assessees with which the assessees may not be satisfied and have filed such appeals before this Court. Therefore we clarify that mere dissatisfaction with the findings of facts arrived at by the learned Tribunal is not at all a sufficient reason to invoke Section 260-A of the Act before this Court. 58. The appeals filed by the Revenue are therefore dismissed with no order as to costs. 8. In the circumstances, having heard the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides, we are of the considered opinion that no substantial question of law arises for consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
