TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 1321X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the learned panel has rightly directed exclusion of M/s.Mindtree since lacking not only the reliable functional similarity but also having extraordinary events in the relevant time span in FY.2009-10. We therefore see no reason to accept the Revenue s instant ground. The same stands rejected. M/s.E-Infochips Bangalore Ltd., Kals Information Systems and Persistent Systems P. Ltd.- It transpires at the outset that this tribunal s co-ordinate bench s order in M/s.Pegasystems Worldwide India Pvt. Ltd. [ 2015 (10) TMI 2495 - ITAT HYDERABAD] has already held in the very assessment year i.e., AY.2010-11 that former twin entities are not functionally similar in software development activity; and therefore, are not to be taken as valid comparab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment dt.02-02-2014 framed in furtherance to the Dispute Resolution Panel DRP , Hyderabad s directions dt.24-12-2014 involving proceedings u/s.143(3) r.w.s.92CA(3) r.w.s.144C(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, the Act ]. Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. A perusal of the rival pleadings indicates that the Revenue s twin substantive grounds in its appeal ITA No.347/Hyd/2015 seek to reverse the DRP s directions excluding M/s. Mind Tree Ltd., from the array of comparables in assessee s line of software development business involving international transactions with its overseas Associated Enterprise (AE) and also directing the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to ascertain the LIBOR rate for 12 months in the period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt for differences in the risk profile of the appellant vis- -vis the comparables and in doing so, he has failed to follow the directions given by the Hon'ble DRP. 11.The learned TPO has grossly erred by charging notional interest on delayed receipt from associated enterprise and Hon'ble DRP has erred in upholding the same. 12.The learned TPO has grossly erred by not appreciating that interest paid on loan borrowed from associated enterprise are at arm s length and the Hon'ble DRP has erred in upholding the same . 4. Learned counsel representing the assessee is fair enough in not pressing for its third, fifth to tenth substantive grounds at this stage. The said grounds stand rejected therefore as not pressed therefore. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the relevant time span in FY.2009-10. We therefore see no reason to accept the Revenue s instant ground. The same stands rejected. 8. We next advert to the assessee s three folded pleadings seeking exclusion of M/s.E-Infochips Bangalore Ltd., Kals Information Systems and Persistent Systems P. Ltd., from the array of comparables. It transpires at the outset that this tribunal s co-ordinate bench s order in M/s.Pegasystems Worldwide India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT ITA Nos.1758 1936/Hyd/2014 has already held in the very assessment year i.e., AY.2010-11 that former twin entities are not functionally similar in software development activity; and therefore, are not to be taken as valid comparables. The very conclusion stands reiterated in M/s.Pare ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
