Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal Upholds Exclusions of Companies in International Pricing Analysis</h1> <h3>Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, Circle -3 (1) (1), Bangalore Versus M/s. Ikanos Communication India Pvt. Ltd.</h3> The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the exclusions directed by the Dispute Resolution Panel for certain companies from the comparables ... Eligible deduction u/s.10A - Held that:- We find that CIT (A) had relied on the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd (2011 (8) TMI 782 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ), wherein it was held unequivocally by their Lordships that items excluded from export turnover had to be excluded from the total turnover also while working out the eligible deduction. TPA - selection of comparable - Held that:- Infosys Ltd could not be considered as a comparable, as it was a giant company in the area of development of software, assuming all risks leading to higher profits. Kals Information Systems Ltd company cannot be selected as a comparable as it was engaged in development of software and software products. Persistent Systems and Solutions Ltd DRP rightly directed exclusion of Persistent Systems and Solutions Ltd from the list of comparables. DRP has also given a finding that assessee was rendering contract software development services to its principal abroad and such services were provided by it through projects and assignments contracted to it by their principals abroad. Thus, according to us, DRP was justified in directing exclusion of persistent Systems and Solutions Ltd, considering the functional profile of the assessee as dissimilar from that of Persistent Systems and Solutions Ltd. Issues:- Appeal and cross objection against assessment under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.- Exclusion of expenditure from export turnover while computing deduction under section 10A.- Exclusion of certain companies from comparables for analyzing international transactions pricing.- Incompatibility of companies as comparables for software development services.Analysis:1. Exclusion of Expenditure from Export Turnover:The Revenue challenged the exclusion of expenditure from export turnover while computing the deduction under section 10A. The CIT (A) relied on a jurisdictional High Court decision that items excluded from export turnover must also be excluded from total turnover for determining the eligible deduction. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s decision, emphasizing the importance of following the High Court's judgment until a different view is established.2. Exclusion of Companies from Comparables:The Revenue contested the exclusion of certain companies, including Infosys Ltd, from the list of comparables for analyzing pricing in international transactions. The Tribunal noted that Infosys Ltd's brand value and revenue composition warranted its exclusion as a comparable. The Tribunal also supported the exclusion of ICRA Techno Analytics Ltd due to lack of segmental information and functional dissimilarities. Similarly, Kals Information Systems Ltd and Persistent Systems and Solutions Ltd were excluded based on functional analysis and revenue sources, aligning with the Tribunal's consistent approach in similar cases.3. Incompatibility of Companies for Software Development Services:The disagreement arose regarding the compatibility of certain companies as comparables for software development services. The Tribunal upheld the exclusion of companies like Kals Information Systems Ltd and Persistent Systems and Solutions Ltd, emphasizing the functional dissimilarities and revenue sources. The decision was supported by the companies' annual reports and functional profiles, justifying their exclusion from the list of comparables.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the exclusions directed by the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) for Infosys Ltd, ICRA Techno Analytics Ltd, Kals Information Systems Ltd, and Persistent Systems and Solutions Ltd from the comparables list. The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's challenges and affirmed the DRP's directions, ensuring a fair analysis of international transactions in software development services.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found