9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 2080X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent. JUDGMENT Dr. Vineet Kothari, The Appellant-assessee has filed this appeal u/s.260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, raising purportedly certain substantial questions of law arising from the order of the ITAT, Bangalore Bench 'A', dated 28.04-2017 passed in IT(TP)A No.288/Bang/2015 (Income Tax Officer vs. M/S. Solidcore Techsoft Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd.,) for A. Y. 2010-11. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... given any details and computation for risk adjustment then the claim of the assessee is purely hypothetical in nature. The co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of Zyme Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra) has considered an identical issue in para 23 as under: "23. We have perused the orders and heard the rival contentions. No doubt, DRP had followed a coordinate bench decision in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have had other client, but it chose to service only its principal. Thus the perceived risk even if any, has been voluntarily taken by the assessee. An adjustment for such a perceived or hypothetical risk can never be factored while working out the Profit Level Indicator. in the circumstances, we are of the opinion that DRP ought not have directed the TPO to consider the risk adjustment at 1%. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appeal filed by the Revenue before the learned Tribunal namely IT(TP)A No. 288/Bang/2015 for A.Y.2010-11 the appellant-assessee had filed its cross-objection and though was registered as IT(TP)A No. No.609/Bang/2015 but the same has not been decided by the learned Tribunal. 6. We do not find any force in the said submission of the learned counsel for the appellant assessee. If the cross-obje ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
