2015 (10) TMI 2495 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal Decision: Assessee's Appeal Partly Allowed, Revenue's Appeal Dismissed

Pegasystems Worldwide Versus The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16 (2), HYDERABAD

Pegasystems Worldwide Versus The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16 (2), HYDERABAD - TMI Issues Involved:1. Selection and rejection of comparables2. Risk adjustment3. Interest on outstanding receivables4. Incorrect margin computation5. Initiation of penalties and imposing interest u/s. 234BDetailed Analysis:1. Selection and Rejection of Comparables:- E infochips Bangalore Ltd.: The Tribunal found that this company was engaged in both software development and ITES, and lacked segmental information. Therefore, it was not considered comparable.- Comp-U-Learn Tech India Ltd.: The Tribunal noted the company's diversified activities and lack of segmental information, directing the AO/TPO to re-examine the available data for comparability.- Kals Information Systems Ltd.: This company was engaged in software and software product development, making it functionally different from the assessee. The Tribunal directed its exclusion.- Persistent Systems and Solutions Ltd.: The Tribunal remitted the issue to the TPO for fresh examination due to the lack of initial objections and detailed analysis.- Tata Elxsi Ltd (Seg): The Tribunal found this company engaged in complex activities with no segmental data available, directing its exclusion.- Sasken Communication Technologies Ltd.: The Tribunal remitted the issue to the TPO for fresh adjudication, as the objections were raised for the first time.- L&T Infotech Ltd.: The Tribunal directed its exclusion due to lack of segmental details and consistency with the DRP's decision in a similar case.2. Risk Adjustment:- This issue was not pressed by the assessee and was treated as withdrawn.3. Interest on Outstanding Receivables:- The Tribunal found that the TPO's adjustment for interest on outstanding receivables was uncalled for, as the assessee was a debt-free company with no interest liability. The Tribunal directed the deletion of the notional interest addition.4. Incorrect Margin Computation:- The Tribunal noted that the issue would become academic if some comparables were rejected. The TPO was directed to consider this while completing the consequential orders.5. Initiation of Penalties and Imposing Interest u/s. 234B:- The Tribunal found these grounds premature and rejected them as academic in nature.Revenue's Appeal:- Infosys Technologies Ltd.: The Tribunal upheld the DRP's decision to exclude this company from the list of comparables, consistent with other cases.- Communication Expenses: The Tribunal agreed with the DRP's direction to reduce communication costs from both export and total turnover, consistent with judicial principles. However, it noted that the factual contentions were not examined by the authorities, making the issue academic.Conclusion:- The assessee's appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the revenue's appeal was dismissed. The Tribunal provided detailed directions for the re-examination and exclusion of certain comparables, and addressed the issue of notional interest on outstanding receivables, ensuring adherence to judicial principles and factual accuracy.