TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (3) TMI 1759
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng Officer ("AO") is bad in law and void ab-initio 2. The Ld. AO/Ld. Transfer Pricing Officer ("TPO")/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax - (Appeals) ("CIT-A") erred on facts and circumstances of the case in determining the arm's length adjustment to the Appellant's international transaction from Associated Enterprises ("AEs"), thereby resulting in the enhancement of returned income of the Appellant by Rs. 15,163,336 3. That the reference made by the Ld. AO suffers from jurisdictional error as the Ld. AO has not recorded any reasons in the assessment order based on which he reached the conclusion that it was "expedient and necessary" to refer the matter to the Ld. TPO for computation of the arm's length price, as is required u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot clear the filter of wages/ sales of 40% to 80% as adopted by the Ld. TPO 5.1.2 The Ld. AO/ Ld. TPO/ Ld. CIT-(A) erred in rejecting L G S Global Ltd. and V M F Soft Tech Ltd. due to non-availability of data, even though their financial data is available in the public domain 5.1.3 The Ld. AO/ Ld. TPO/ Ld. CIT-(A) erred in rejecting Maars Software International Ltd., Melstar Information Technologies Ltd. and V J I L Consulting Ltd. even though these were not persistent loss making for consecutive three years (FY 2004-05 to FY 2006-07) 6 That the Ld. AO/ Ld. TPO/ Ld. CIT-(A) has erred in erroneously including in the final comparable set one company i.e. Infosys Technologies Limited ("Infosys") with different functional and economic ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and in law in charging interest under section 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act 12 That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act mechanically and without recording any adequate satisfaction for such initiation." 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee is a subsidiary company of ZTE Corporation, engaged in trading of telecom equipment and mobile handsets. It is also engaged in provision of marketing support services, hardware support services, repair and maintenance services and software support services. It filed its return of income on 14.11.2007 at Rs. 18291080/-. During the year it was noted that assessee has entered into internationa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e ld AO preferred appeal before the ld CIT(A) who vide order dated 19.08.2014 partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. The assessee further aggrieved by the order of the ld CIT(A) has preferred appeal before us. 6. Though assessee has raised 12 grounds of appeal but in nutshell it was submitted that assessee objects to inclusion of Infosys Technologies Ltd as comparable taken by the ld Transfer Pricing Officer where the PLI of that comparable was 40.38% as per ground No. 6 of the appeal. The ld AR reiterated the submissions made before the ld CIT(A). He submitted that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Agnity India Technologies Pvt. Ltd (TS-189-SC-2013-Del-TP) has held that Infosys should be rejected. He further submitted that there is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....echnologies ltd as a comparable company in its transfer pricing study report. That shows that at the time of preparation of transfer pricing study report assessee find himself that Infosys is having the similar FAR as compared to the assessee. Before the ld Transfer Pricing Officer the updated margins were also provided of this company and no objections were taken. This fact is evident from the letter of Transfer Pricing Officer dated 31.08.2010 addressed to the assessee. Furthermore, before the Transfer Pricing Officer vide letter dated 13.10.2010 has accepted the comparable without any comment. Therefore, it is apparent that assessee has not challenged this comparable before the ld TPO. However, for the first time it was challenged before....